Comments on: What Drives Employee Engagement?

By: David Zinger

David Zinger — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 18:05:35 +0000

Abhishek:

Thanks for the summary from the Conference board and Towers.

I am now thinking about the word “drivers.” I will be writing a short rant post on this in a few weeks.

I don’t care for the word in relationship to employees, work, and organizations.

Don’t empower me and don’t drive me. I already have power and I drive myself thank you.

David

By: Abhishek

Abhishek — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 13:43:59 +0000

Great to see you visit my blog!
I agree with your point, it would be a worthwhile exercise classifying the drivers.

By: S_Sivakumar

S_Sivakumar — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 12:36:59 +0000

It will be good to divide the drivers into positive and negative, say those that have strong positive impact when handled positively (eg nature of the job) or negative (relationship with Manager). It is true that all drivers can have positive and negative implications, but some have more “pull in” effect, while some have more “push out” effect!

By: List of the Top Blog Posts of 2009 « Mumblr

List of the Top Blog Posts of 2009 « Mumblr — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 06:23:53 +0000

[...] is super critical to understand what drives employee engagement. Remember, your organization has its own set of unique [...]

By: Abhishek

Abhishek — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 02:24:03 +0000

Thanks a lot for your comments. Appreciate it.
Gallup’s research focuses primarily on workgroup managers. The Q12 itself is a workgroup tool. It has limited focus on the more macro workplace issues.

I am not undermining the importance of direct managers, but am just saying that there might be situations when managers can’t do much. A workplace is optimized when both these issues are improved in tandem.

By: Derek Irvine, Globoforce

Derek Irvine, Globoforce — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 14:30:49 +0000

Great post, but I would argue that manager style is critical to a stable foundation. Gallup research released earlier this month found one simple factor – direct manager style – can profoundly impact employee engagement. To summarize:

• Managers who focus on employee strengths have 61% engaged employees and 1% actively disengaged

• Managers who focus on employee weaknesses have 45% engaged employees and 22% actively disengaged

• Managers who ignore their employees have 2% engaged employees and 40% actively disengaged

http://globoforce.blogspot.com/2009/11/strengths-weaknesses-ignored-how-are.html

I do agree with your statement that systems are important as well. Research and suggestions out of Hay Group also encouraged “developing systems to encourage employee success.” Strategic employee recognition is just such a powerful system that, when deployed properly, gives employees that necessary “line of sight.” By following strategic recognition best practice of linking every recognition to a company value or strategic objective, you are strongly and positively reinforcing precisely those behaviors or actions that demonstrate the company values in achievement of those objectives.

More on the Hay Group article here: http://globoforce.blogspot.com/2009/11/systems-of-engagement.html

By: Abhishek

Abhishek — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 00:34:59 +0000

Thanks for your comments!

By: Hinda Incentives

Hinda Incentives — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:35:03 +0000

I would completely agree with you that engagement begins with mangagement. What good does an incentives program do if the employee doesn’t feel their boss doesn’t care much about them in the first place. Makes for a hollow program. Enjoyed the read!