5: Creating the Engaged Culture
Working with individual employees or teams can have benefits, but they tend to be limited when these employees and teams are situated in a culture that discourages engagement. In such an instance, any gains will be modest and temporary. A better approach is cultural transformation to ensure that an organization is supportive, or at least not obstructive, of engagement.
Cultural change is difficult and expensive, but it is much more effective and enduring. It requires very strong commitment from the very top of the organization, and perseverance to get people (particularly the middle ranks of management) to change their way of thinking from a culture that they believe to be functional. It is also difficult to sell the idea of cultural change in an organization that is focused on cost-cutting and operational efficiency, and are incredulous of the benefits of cultural change.
An Engaged Workforce
The author cites another source that describes and engaged worker as someone who has a positive and fulfilling state of mind that expresses itself in their enthusiasm, dedication, and absorption. The engaged employee sees his personal goals as being aligned with those of his employer - hence feels personally involved in achieving results for the organization.
He gives an analogy to service experiences: a waiter can be perfectly competent at his job, doing all the tasks required to fulfill his role. If he's not very motivated, the service is slow and inattentive and tasks are done to the bare minimum level of acceptance. If he's motivated, service is prompt and attentive, and he shows genuine interest in ensuring the customer has a great experience. It's obvious which waiter will be preferred by the customer. Workers in any role have similar behaviors. Disengaged workers provide service to their employer that is just barely adequate, whereas engaged workers will take a genuine interest in achieving outcomes.
A significant factor in instilling workers with positive beliefs and attitudes is for leaders to model them. The author cites a few studies that demonstrate how the attitudes of leaders trickle down to the workers, though it's noted that this is only effective when the leader's positive attitude is consistent.
Management style is also influential. Command-and-control leaders who are focused on ensuring employees perform tasks create employees that are focused only on performing tasks to meet minimum expectations. Empowering leaders who are focused on achieving outcomes and provide employees with latitude and sufficient resources/authority create employees who are focused on outcomes and feel empowered to do more to achieve them.
(EN: An interesting phenomenon I've observed in a couple of organizations with domineering leaders is that certain employees actually prefer them. There is a sense of safety for an employee who feels safe so long as he follows orders - lack of results is not his fault. The greatest stress is created in workplaces where employees are constrained by procedure and still expected to generate results.)
Building Engagement
The author provides a litany of reasons that there is little published research on improving engagement, and so much of the how-to literature is based on anecdotal evidence (or none at all). And so, most firms must do their own research - interviews, surveys, focus groups, and the like - to determine the obstacles to having an engaged workforce.
However, objectivity remains an issue. Leaders must be willing to ask the hard questions, accept the answers, and be willing to make changes within themselves and their organization. One cannot simply command employees to improve their attitudes, or expect any change in the people if the culture of the organization remains the same.
Unfortunately, in the protracted volatility of the world economy, leaders tend to regard the cultural development of their organizations as being functionally unnecessary to achieving short-term financial results. The overall tone of desperation, not to mention the actions taken in panic, do much to undermine employee engagement and confidence. Demanding employees "do more with less" and having reductions in workforce do not increase productivity or engagement, but decrease both as employees begin to question the sustainability of their workplace.
With this in mind, leaders who wish to improve productivity and engagement must seek to maintain a positive outlook and provide adequate resources to enable employees to accomplish their work in an engaged fashion.
Striking a Balance
The author mentions the concept of "work-life balance," which has been identified as a critical factor in employee burnout. Even employees who have a positive attitude about their work become overwhelmed when the amount of time and attention they give to their careers interferes with having a personal life.
In general, it's acknowledged that employees need to rest in order to achieve optimum performance. For the physical worker, the signs of fatigue are physical and can be readily observed; but for the knowledge worker, the fatigue is mental and emotional and cannot be readily observed - and it is often not even acknowledged that mental/emotional fatigue is a valid condition.
Especially with technology, the boundary between professional and private lives is becoming blurred. The employee with a smart phone is always on the clock, constantly checking and responding to work-related issues. Knowledge workers read and study work-related material at home or on the go. As such, there is no such thing as a "day off" of work.
It's also noted that workplace stress negatively affects the personal lives of employees, as stress experienced in the workplace continues to affect them after they have gone home. The tension that can be created diminishes the recuperative effects of time off