The first problem with "employee engagement" is the illusion, mostly promoted by consultants who sell tricks, that there's a trick to it.
There is no trick to it.
It came out Monday that the Chicago Tribune had been sold. The Trib's top political columnist John Cass walked into the office the day after the news broke, and he wrote about the experience:
"As I wandered through the newsroom Monday morning, a colleague stopped me with a question. I figured it would have something to do with anxiety and all the other emotions running through all of us employed by an organization where big news was made about some awfully big changes around here."
But no. She asked him about a story he was working on that she needed his help with.
"Her desk was piled with documents and other papers, and bits of notes and scraps of ideas and old phone numbers written in margins, and electronic nuggets of information on the computer screen before her."
The reporter wasn't frozen in fear about what changes the sale might bring. She wasn't going through the five stages of grief. She was busy doing the job she loves.
If our organizations did more work that employees loved--more work they could connect with what matters to them, more work that demanded their best skill and thinking--we wouldn't have to worry about "engagement."
Since they don't, we do.
The engagement problem is so much more fundamental than we make it out to be. It's nothing short of: What can this company do to make our products, services or culture worthy of the earnest effort of our most intelligent, passionate employees?
If an organization's top leadership is willing to ask that question, the employee communicator should be there 12 hours a day helping them answer it and get it across.
If not, do the only thing we have a right to expect of any employee whom we haven't managed to inspire: An honest day's work for an honest day's pay.
Comments (7)
David, I believe I can sum up today's posting in two words: common sense. You speak it ... Albeit curmudgeonly. And that's exactly what this depraved nook of the blogosphere needs.
Posted by Michael Sebastian | April 5, 2007 9:59 AM
Posted on April 5, 2007 09:59
I totally agree, and see that a lot working in a hospital. From administration's point of view, it sometimes seems like many of these nurses/physical therapists/radiologists seem "unengaged," but if you ask their patients they're anything but.
Just because their passion lies in what they do, administration sometimes interprets that as not being engaged in what administration feels passionate about.
In that instance, "engagement" is broken from the get-go.
Posted by Eileen | April 5, 2007 10:38 AM
Posted on April 5, 2007 10:38
Right on, Eileen--
Beyond making nurses generally and constantly aware of the health care environment around them (and we should help employees understand the context of their work as well as we possibly can), we certainly don't want them focusing on the marketing strategy, any more than we want management obsessing on bedpan-placement techniques.
That said, you could argue for a "management engagement" program to get the C-suite better acquainted with the daily work of the nurses, so they'd understand why the nurses don't have time to mull over the exciting new Synergize 2007 Go-Forward Plan.
Posted by David Murray | April 5, 2007 11:28 AM
Posted on April 5, 2007 11:28
Aside from good old stupid management, I see bureacracy as one of the biggest obstacles to employee engagement. It's all the things that get in the way of meaningful work that end up turning people off -- the stupid policies, the layers of approvals, the procedures that don't consider the customer, the internal politics, the crappy computer interfaces, the boring and irrelevant communications.
That reporter at the Tribune probably doesn't have much that gets in the way of doing her job. If it were only true in much of the corporate world....
Posted by Ron Shewchuk | April 5, 2007 5:46 PM
Posted on April 5, 2007 17:46
Well, she has editors.
But you're right, Ron; layers take the wind out of employees' sails.
Posted by David Murray | April 5, 2007 6:17 PM
Posted on April 5, 2007 18:17
From a consultant to all the companies out there:
Want "engaged" employees? Treat them like adults. Communicate. Don't try to manipulate information. Give them what they need to do their jobs. Then let them.
There. I guess I can sell the business now.
Posted by Robert J Holland, ABC | April 6, 2007 11:21 AM
Posted on April 6, 2007 11:21
You're an engagement guru now, Robert.
Posted by David Murray | April 6, 2007 3:54 PM
Posted on April 6, 2007 15:54