Culture to Engage

Engaged in Engagement

Managers see their people get the job done. Managers direct their units or teams to fulfill their responsibilities. When managers do their jobs, teams fulfill their assignments. When teams fulfill their assignments, the organization achieves its purpose.

That makes the manager's role seem simple. It ain't necessarily so.

Consider this statement from Agha Hasan Abedi:

The conventional definition of management is getting work done through people, but real management is developing people through work.

I agree completely with Abedi's statement. However, I offer it with these qualifications:

1. I found the quote as lead-in to the article Making the Best Managers by Nancy Thomas and Scott Saslow of The Institute of Executive Development. Credit to my sources.
2. Abedi, as founder of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International, was "accused of perpetrating the largest financial fraud in history." So, the man had doubtful ethics...but good sense about the manager's true role.

I offer my co-premises:

The manager engaged in providing opportunities and situations that generate development also generates engagement among employees.

The employee engaged in his work, his company's purpose, and the connection between the two, develops and improves his skills, knowledge and abilities.

More and more management skills are required by today's complexities. Yet, the specific engagement attributes too often escape attention. These attributes allow managers to

• Increase engagement among their people,
• Stimulate continuous development by those people,
• Exercise management skills with greater ease and confidence,
• Lead teams to fulfill expectations,
• Contribute to achievement of company goals and objectives.

A manager engaged in promoting development among her people typically exhibits some or all of these interests:

• People Interest: curiosity, listening, empathy
• Company Interest: commitment, "ownership," innovation
• Growth Interest: leadership, performance improvement, personal/professional development.

And it is accurate to say the employee whom such a leader engages demonstrates those same interests.

I/O/W, engagement breeds engagement.

Learning's Role in a Culture of Engagement

November issue of Chief Learning Officer includes Dianne Durkin's How Loyalty and Employee Engagement Add Up to Corporate Profits. For the entire article click the title. For its heart and soul, the gist of Durkin's article follows.

Her words are in italics. After some points I've placed links to earlier posts in this blog, Culture to Engage. I'm including the links to give you added information about building a culture of engagement and so building customer and employee loyalty.

• Put your purpose out there. This means establishing organizational purpose and values and communicating them clearly with employees. Please see What'd You Expect (10/28)

• Clearly articulate your company's values. The more an individual feels on the same page in terms of what has meaning, what gives worth, and what propels the organization, the more she is willing to engage her time, energy, and effort in that company. Please see Voicing Values (10/20) and Expressing Value (10/21)

• Establish a culture of trust. Strong agreement. I should have made the time to post just a fraction of the info I have regarding trust and its power (and powerful absence) as a positive factor in an organization's culture of engagement.

• Align and communicate. OK, Durkin and I diverge slightly. Her article stresses communication regarding alignment with company strategy and direction. I stress communication regarding the interpersonal, to build stronger relationships among members of the organization, which I believe is fundamental engagement. Please see What to Say (10/26).

• Listen to employees.There are thousands of ideas sitting in employees' heads, but many companies suppress them, which brings down employee morale. Once morale is down.... Well, you know what happens. Listening is more than just hearing. Listening benefits (and so do the employees) when a number of forums that encourage employee expression exist. Please see If I May Make a Suggestion (11/05).

• Engage people in solutions. Durkin's refers to allowing employees to work the suggestions you've listened to them present. There's powerful ownership in this. Please see If I May Make a Suggestion (11/05).

• Learning is the new 401(k). Here's Durkin's point: Employees want to be in continuous growth and learning mode, and learning is a benefit to them, as well as the company. Give them the opportunity to continuously learn, and they will be forever loyal. (I like that I'm not the only one to shamelessly split infinitives.)

• Celebrate successes. Sometimes we place too stringent or too high a definition on "successes." By recognizing, discussing, and appreciating even the minor "feel goods" we can celebrate what makes the organization successful. Please see Engagement and the FGQ (10/31).

• Leadership and management training. The influence of an employee's manager on her engagement is proven. Durkin states, An employee's manager, supervisor or leader is the most important person to him or her. This person is an employee's lifeline to information, recognition, challenges and future vision. Please see Engaging Leadership (11/19) and Whose Job Is It, Anyway? (10/23).

• Create a caring corporate culture. The surest way to let employees know their company (and its culture) cares for them is to communicate the value they bring to the company. Not only when they are hired. Nor upon their 5th, 10th, and 30th anniversaries of service. Please see Expressing Value (10/21).

It must be obvious that I'm in pretty complete agreement with the points Durkin has researched and assembled.

And you?

How to Hire a Candidate (You Want) to Stay

The cover story in the November issue of Talent Management magazine focuses on the importance of "Finding Candidates with the Right Fit" for the job. In a sidebar Manny Avramidis of the American Management Association makes this observation:

A challenge an organization faces is it never establishes a foundation--they just go out there and say, 'I need a marketing professional,' and they don't tie it in to the other pillars...that are important to make sure the person will fit into the organization.

An organization increases its chances for successful hiring when it knows what it takes for the candidate to fit the job/organization and for the job/organization to fit the candidate. Avramidis suggests hiring professionals should ask three questions (italicized). I offer comments.

Does the organization have identified corporate values?
Those values should have been identified long before the current hiring situation. Seriously, the values should be shared with the candidate, discussed with the candidate, and scenario'd for the candidate to consider and "play with." How much will that show and tell the hiring professional about the candidate's talents and the candidate's fit? My 10/21/07 posting, Expressing Value, presented how corporate values are relevant to an employee's engagement in her work and how managers can convey those values to the employee. What's said there applies to job candidates as well.

What are the core competencies most jobs would expect?
You cannot assume this "goes without saying." Assuming you and the candidate know the expected competencies makes it possible that, in time, you will not pay attention to the core competencies during the candidate search. Assuming may reduce speaking explicitly (and listening just as explicitly) to the candidate about what skills, abilities, and talents he brings to the job. The candidate should not only fit the job; the job should fit the candidate. He deserves the chance to excuse himself from possible failure by seeing up front the absence of fit. (B/T/W, a manager's core competency must be communication with his personnel.)

Is it clear into what absolute role the job candidate will fit? Does that align with the corporate vision?
The significant phrase in this pair of questions is corporate vision. It is important to know that the individual applying her specific talents to a specific job role. I believe it is just as important to know if the individual and the corporate vision meld. That means the corporate vision warrants being open discussion during the interview process. Avramidis states the candidate should be allowed to ask questions. My hope is that those questions are about more than job expectations, that they extend to Big Picture areas like corporate vision. The hiring professional does everyone good service by conducting interviews that encourage such questions.

Interesting Reading

I will have more (much more) to write about several articles in the most recent issue of Talent Management magazine.

In the meantime, you may wish to click that title. You can peruse the current issue on line.

A good bit of interesting in articles such as

• "Finding Candidates with the Right Fit"

• "Training the Ethical Workforce"

• "The Art and Science of Influence"

• "Making the Best Managers"

See you tomorrow.

Engaging Leadership

Theresa Welbourne, CEO and founder of eePulse, states:

In the same way that being confident in the market means you are more likely to spend more money, being confident in the leadership of your organization and in the firm’s direction translates to employees being:

• Willing to remain employed when times are a little tough.
• Helping with special programs.
• Coming up with new ideas.
• Going the extra mile for a customer.

Welbourne bullets right-on characteristics of an engaged employee. With those four for starters, we could add another 14 or 40.

The point Theresa makes is a good one: the more confidence employees have in their company's leadership, the more likely they are to engage their time, energy, and willingness.

Leadership confidence substantially adds to the manager's role of building a culture of engagement. Welbourne makes this clear by stating:

Research shows leader attitudes directly affect manager attitudes that then directly affect employee attitudes.

Leader's attitude formulates company culture. Manager's application of the attitude to the work floor and work force actualizes the culture. The manager's role in making an engagement culture real for the employees blends leadership and management.

Here are two "sideline points" I suggest we keep in mind:

• It takes a leader's full-scale engagement to generate full-scale confidence in her leadership.
• It takes a manager's complete engagement to transform the attitude to actuality.

I/O/W...engagement is not for employees only.

Sources:
Welbourne, Theresa, "Leadership Energy and Confidence: What Do the Trends Tell Us about 2007?", Talent Management, April 2007