He did that with an irreverent (gently sarcastic?) take on the ills that engagement is supposed to cure and explaining five engaging actions that bosses at any/every level can and should take.
Wally is a gentleman and far more subtle than I, so he refrained from the blunt assessment I recently gave a client after recommending a similar program.
When “Richard” balked at the personal effort involved and excused his reluctance by saying he would rather “bring in professionals to formulate and implement a strong engagement program” I couldn’t stop laughing.
Richard was offended and we, as my 90 year-old maiden aunt used to say, had words.
The upshot was that I suggested Richard do two things,
find a coach who wasn’t into DIY and had a comprehensive list of consultants to recommend; and
update his resume now, since, based on his team’s productivity, creativity and turnover, he would be needing it sooner rather than later.
Last summer I wrote that the solution to having employees who care about their work and company was to look in the mirror, since their caring was a direct result of your management and the culture it engendered.
A few days ago Jeff Haden wrote in Inc. magazine about eight things people want that are a function of your MAP as opposed to your budget.
The words and explanations vary slightly, but this is the same advice I and dozens of other culture mavens have been saying for years.
Culture matters; it matters more than strategy, planning and even compensation.
Culture is your responsibility.
Culture is how you show you care.
Culture is you.
Whereas it’s barely possible to effectively live a personal lie, it just isn’t possible to propagate a culture based on one.
Not in ten lifetimes could you implement a culture that deviates from your basic values, your MAP, your essence.
You can provide what people crave, because you can change at any time you choose.
That’s the key, the choice is yours; it can’t be made for you by someone else or made by you because another desires it.
You can change, but only if you want to change.
Valentine’s Day is a good day to choose to start changing.
It won’t be easy; it will take more than a day; but it will take longer if you don’t start now.
It’s always surprising how often different sources address the same problems offering similar solutions, but in such different ways that at first glance you wouldn’t notice.
Within days of each other, both Fortune/CNN and BNET offered up good information on employee motivation. Fortune/CNN article was science-based, while BNET was experience-based, with a leavening of humor.
They both said essentially the same thing with one exception, which I’ll get to in a minute.
Motivating employees means providing real purpose in their work; it requires challenging them and encouraging them to learn and grow; and it requires clear communications, including well-defined plans, roles and responsibilities.
Pretty standard stuff.
Now for the exception; the science offered up a new twist that just might help your implementation.
Removing obstacles is not the flip side of providing purpose, challenge and clear communications.
In other words, this is not one of those times that removing the negative means the positive will automatically rush in to fill the void or vice versa, that having the positives will overcome the negatives.
In this case you need to address the two as totally separate subjects.
First, remove any obvious negatives.
Next, start implementing the positives.
Third, be on the lookout for new obstacles.
Fourth, and most important, be sure that you on the side of the angels and not one of the obstacles.
Are you one of the thousands of managers who spend your days trying to increase productivity and improve your company’s bottom line and you nights worrying that you aren’t doing it fast enough—if at all?
Does your company hire experts to teach motivation and employee engagement techniques?
Do you twist in the wind trying to implement complex, sometimes costly, approaches?
Why complex when some of the smartest CEOs, advisors and academics are all saying the same thing?
Simply put, in the words of Tony Hsieh, if your employees are happy they will make your customers happy; if your customers are happy they’ll spend more; if they spend more your bottom line will grow.
Saturday I gave you multiple links showing just how simple and inexpensive engaging your people can be—but not everybody reads Saturday.
So, instead of writing yet another post on engagement, I thought provide a video from Guy Kawasaki, who talks about how to “enchant” your employees.
His advice is simple and doable, although it does require the right MAP.
The only cost may be to your ego, since in order to implement it you need to change.
…more employees intend to stay with their employer, feel motivated to put forth extra effort, recommend their companies as a great place to work, and say they love their current organization.
What’s the difference; why such disparate results?
More research from Harvard shows that what excites and engages people has nothing to do with money and everything to do with managers (you knew that).
According to recent research, the single most important factor is simply a sense of making progress on meaningful work.
Next, two excellent survey-based articles about women and work.
First, research from Harvard Business Review, looks at the factors that impact both women and men when competing.
…how women and men perform at work may be strongly linked to the gender of the person they are competing against.
And from McKinsey comes advice based on feedback that focuses on changing deeply embedded attitudes.
…a survey we conducted earlier this year indicated that although a majority of women who make it to senior roles have a real desire to lead, few think they have meaningful support to do so, and even fewer think they’re in line to move up.
Gallup estimates the cost of America’s disengagement crisis at a staggering $300 billion in lost productivity annually.
$300 billion is a number that should get anyone’s attention.
The engagement issue is relatively simple and definitely cheap to solve.
The problem is that, as usual, employees and managers aren’t on the same page.
The research shows that for employees “the single most important [event] — by far — is simply making progress in meaningful work.”
Managers are another story.
“When we asked 669 managers from companies around the world to rank five employee motivators in terms of importance, they ranked “supporting progress” dead last. Fully 95 percent of these managers failed to recognize that progress in meaningful work is the primary motivator, well ahead of traditional incentives like raises and bonuses.”
What constitutes supporting progress isn’t rocket science, either.
Autonomy, meaning no micromanagement;
sufficient resources, meaning valid scheduling and enough of whatever to get the job done without having to beg or being left to fail without them; and
learning from problems, meaning understanding the why and how, not just the what.
If you find any of the three difficult to provide you need to look in the mirror.
The problem isn’t about having time to support progress; the problem is that your MAP doesn’t support the concept.
There is much written about the importance of authenticity and trust when it comes to engaging employees and developing culture.
Enough, in fact, that you could spend years trying to digest it all.
So I thought it would be useful to offer up some very basic advice (often attributed to Frank Outlaw, the Josephson Institute can find no proof of him as the author).
Watch your thoughts, for they become words.
Watch your words, for they become actions.
Watch your actions, for they become habits.
Watch your habits, for they become character.
Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
This common wisdom is the kind of thing you can print out and keep as a mantra.
Best of all, it applies equally to individuals, companies and other organizations.
The idea that carrots aren’t the best management approach isn’t new, but he points out something that is often overlooked.
We forget that mastery is something human beings seek because we’re human beings. We like to get better at stuff, because it’s inherently satisfying. That’s why people do recreational sports, why people play musical instruments on the weekend, why people do crafts and things.
However, I do believe that rewards have their purpose, not as the motivation to do something, but as the acknowledgement that it was done well.
If that were not true then all of the various competitions associated with what people do on their own time for pleasure wouldn’t exist.
We humans have a strong tendency to compare what we do with similar things done by others.
We treasure not only the prizes, trophies and ribbons of our more formalized efforts, but also the everyday comments when others recognize how well we do it.
From the outside you may not see much difference between carrots and acknowledgement, but when you are on the receiving end the difference is glaring—and the difference is in the presentation.
Einstein defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome.”
Managers who cling to carrots instead of acknowledgements are crazy.
I really enjoy Dan McCarthy over at Great Leadership; we may not always agree, but he has never wasted my time and I always learn something.
Saturday was no exception and I want to share the survey Dan posted, because I think it’s of major importance whether you are a manager or a worker.
Engagement is high on management’s list of preferred employee attitude, but management seems to have a disconnect when it comes to how to engender it.
Too many managers choose to ignore that the most basic, necessary ingredient in engagement is trust and, for good reason, trust is in short supply these days.
04.14.2010 – A new Maritz® Poll conducted by Maritz Research, a leader in employee satisfaction research, paints a dire outlook of American workforce attitudes toward employers. Employees’ trust toward their workplace has taken a severe hit, with employees across all industry segments citing a lack of trust in not only senior leaders, but direct managers and co-workers as well.
According to the poll, few (11 percent) employees strongly agree their managers show consistency between their words and actions. In addition, only seven percent of employees strongly agree they trust senior leaders to look out for their best interest, and only seven percent strongly agree they trust their co-workers to do so. Approximately one-fifth of respondents disagree that their company’s leader is completely honest and ethical, and one-quarter of respondents disagree that they trust management to make the right decisions in times of uncertainty. While workplace trust has been dwindling since the Enron, WorldCom, and Tyco scandals of the earlier part of the decade, threats of layoffs and downsizing have only exacerbated the problem.
“In times like these, trust is an especially critical issue. Companies need their best people more than ever to be engaged and productive. But, often, this process starts at the top,” says Rick Garlick, Ph.D., senior director of consulting and strategic implementation, Hospitality Research Group, Maritz Research. “You’ve got to maintain credibility with your workforce as a means of getting them to totally buy in to the mission and vision of your company. Anything less fosters a disengaged workforce that puts self-interest at the top of its list of priorities.”
In cases where management trust was strong, the study found that employees were significantly more committed to working for their companies. More than half of respondents (58 percent) with strong trust in their management were completely satisfied with their job, while only four percent of respondents with weak trust in management cited they were completely satisfied with their job.
The study also revealed:
• Nearly two-thirds (63 percent) of respondents with strong trust in management would be happy to spend the rest of their career with their present company. This compares to only seven percent of respondents who have weak trust in management.
• More than half of those surveyed (51 percent) with strong management trust would invest money in their company if they could versus only six percent of those surveyed with weak management trust.
• Only three percent of respondents with weak management trust look forward to coming to work everyday. For those with strong management trust, 50 percent responded they look forward to coming to work everyday. Which Industry Fares Well? Hospitality Employees and Its Customers
While the survey suggests there is room for improvement across all sectors, the hospitality industry seems to have some advantages over others. For example, hospitality employees (14 percent) are more likely than other industry segments (9 percent) to rate their company as a “fun place to work.” Hospitality sector employees also tend to rate their companies better on customer service-related issues and the impact they make:
• More than one-third (34 percent) completely understand how their work impacts customers’ experiences, compared to only 23 percent in other industries.
• Twenty percent believe they have the authority they need to respond promptly to customer problems and requests, versus just 15 percent of respondents in other industries.
Approximately one-fifth (21 percent) of hospitality respondents believe their customers would rate the service they deliver as excellent, compared to only 14 percent of respondents in other segments.
However, there is room for improvement. Only 15 percent of employees agree that their company has the policies, systems and procedures in place to deliver outstanding customer service.
“With the hospitality industry taking one of the biggest hits due to poor economic conditions and negative perceptions, it is promising that employees feel positive about the connection of their daily work to customer service issues. But, it is still not a rosy picture when it comes to engagement. The results show that a lack of trust runs rampant in this sector as well, which impacts employees’ perceived long term career development opportunities, co-worker relationships, and productivity levels,” says Garlick. Don’t slash that recognition program
The weak economy forced companies to cut costs across the organization. And, unfortunately, formal recognition programs were frequently sacrificed. More than one-third of respondents (33 percent) cited their company scaled back or eliminated their recognition program in the past year. There is some data, at least from the employees’ perspective, to suggest these cuts have had an impact on the quality of service they deliver to customers. Among employees whose companies kept recognition programs intact, 25 percent strongly agreed their customers would rate their service as excellent. Among those whose companies cut back on their recognition programs or never had one, only 14 percent strongly agreed customers would rate their service as excellent.
“Recognition programs are critical to demonstrating to employees that they are valued and appreciated for the work they perform. It’s an important engagement tool, as it helps to reinforce messages about how people are making an impact,” says Garlick. “This is a wake-up call for management teams that consider employee recognition programs as expendable. Not only do recognition programs positively impact employee engagement levels, they ultimately lead to positive customer service perceptions, which impact the bottom line.” About Maritz® Poll
Maritz® Poll is a copyrighted poll conducted since 1988 by Maritz Research. Maritz Poll comprises regular surveys on topics related to the automotive, financial services, hospitality, retail, technology, and telecommunications sectors as well as workplace issues. This poll was conducted March 1-5, 2010. The 2,004 respondents were people who were employed full time and drawn from a national e-mail panel. Sampling error for the overall poll is +/-3 percent. Results of the poll may be used in print or broadcast media, provided credit is given to the Maritz Poll and/or Maritz Research. About Maritz Research
As one of the world’s largest marketing research firms, Maritz Research, a unit of Maritz, helps many of today’s most successful companies improve performance through an actionable understanding of their customers, employees, and channel partners. Founded in 1973, Maritz Research offers a range of strategic and tactical solutions concentrating primarily in the automotive, financial services, hospitality, telecommunications and technology and retail industries. Maritz Research projects are carried out in compliance with the International Standard: ISO 20252:2006 Market, Opinion, and Social Research Standard. Maritz Research is a member of CASRO and official sponsor of the American Marketing Association.
If trust is lacking in your organization don’t go looking for a quick fix.
Trust is the opposite of weight; gaining weight is fast and easy, while losing it is slow and difficult. Trust can be lost in the blink of an eye, while regaining it may never happen.