Vision Qwest Solutions

The definition of employee engagement continues to elude us.  As a matter of fact, it is overwhelming to see the data and the different perspectives of what employee engagement means.  It is also interesting to see what this term means across various industries and business disciplines.  I am waiting for the drum rolls and the parade to start, because in someone’s mind, they have found the answer.

As an HR professional, I have personally seen a lot of trends come and go.  We have all wanted to put on a happy face, sit with the executive team and lay the groundwork for engaging employees and to ensure that our employees are happy little campers; akin to being puppets at our disposal.  Not realistic, nor a desired outcome; especially when there is a negative interpretation from the employees that you support.  More importantly, this is definitely not my perspective of what employee engagement means.

We think we have the answers, but the employees that we support have a totally different perspective.  After all, it is the employee’s perspective that matters most in defining employee engagement.  And speaking of perspectives, here is a very appropriate post that I found on www.danpontefrat.com.  In a recent post entitled “Employee Engagement is not about Buzz Words”, he states that:

“Organizations that sound the trumpet of annual, quarterly, or weekly engagement gimmicks are somewhere between draft and imbecilic.  You may trick me with cotton candy once, but I’m eventually going to figure out it’s only made of sugar and fancy food coloring.”  Read More

I like this post because it is a poignant statement about the state of affairs of employee engagement in today’s workplace and a true wake up call for HR practitioners and executives to understand that gimmicks do not work.  Ever since the introduction of this nebulous phrase, businesses have been hopping from one band wagon to another to find the perfect formula to ensure that employees “help to sustain the mission, vision, and business goals of the organization”.  What does not work is a sugary sweet approach to managing people.  Be mindful that I did not use the words “managing employees”.   There have been major strides made in terms of how we manage processes, how we utilize technology, how we implement best practices, and how we engage external customers; yet we are still worlds away from garnering the collective forces of the “people” that support organizations in these key initiatives.

Oftentimes, it is hard for organizations to separate the employee from that of being a person.  I contend that we are working with one in the same – a person who works everyday, a person that has supported an organization faithfully for years awaiting a gold watch; a person who has to manage work life and family in today’s economic climate; a person who does have personal aspirations; a person who wants to give back to the organization that they support; and last but not least, a person who wants to be appreciated for what they give day-to-day.

It is the understanding of this perspective that will create the “cultural” and engagement initiatives that are necessary to affect bottom line effectiveness.  It is my premise that organizations need to embrace, on an individual level, the mind-think of the “person” – an employee, and figure out how to truly embrace them in the day-to-day activities of work.

This is not conjecture.  And yet, within the realm of employee engagement, there are so many variables that will need to be addressed one post at a time.  These include:

• The culture of the organization
• The organizations’ true relationship with their employees
• The management and communication styles of department leaders and of the senior management team
• The consistency and meaningfulness of communication that is disseminated
• Whether there is a thorough understanding of the workforce and what their collective and individual needs are
• How an organization manages generational differences in the work environment or even see this as an issue
• Retention and why employees leave the organization
• How flexible the organization is to developing and mentoring employees
• Embracing;  good, bad, and indifferent, varying opinions of what is really happening within an organizations’ dynamics
• Respect for various roles and positions
• The culture of the organization, how rigid the organization is to embracing change
• Technology and how it has altered “connectivity in the workplace
• An understanding from each employee of how they “fit” within an organization

There are other issues, but this seems to be a good starting point.

What are your thoughts on embracing the employees’ perspective of employee engagement?

Create Twiim