Once More, Why Is EE NOT the End Result?

I was talking to a new friend at a party Sunday evening, Indian (Sanskrit) music in the background. I struggled a bit explaining that I want to help my clients increase/improve their employees' engagement, but that I do not want that to be the desired end.

Like the zoo keeper who sees washing the elephant as just what's necessary to keep it happy and presentable. I doubt that hosing down the elephant is the end in itself.

Your company can achieve whatever results you want:

• Greater customer satisfaction
• Easier employee recruitment
• Longer personnel retention
• Reduced operations expenses
• Increased patient safety scores
• Whatever, whatever, whatever

Those are the results. The effort to increase employee engagement is to achieve those results faster, better, easier.

Your managers need to ask and answer these related questions.

• By what strategy and processes do we get to the desired result(s)?
• In what manner do I stimulate employees to engage in the strategy and processes?

A variety of resources can help your managers answer those questions.

• Informal, regular discussions
• External trainers, presenters
• (Relevant) book group
• Conferences and seminars
• Newsletters, web-logs, membership sites

Your leaders need consistent attention to the what, how and why of the business culture. It is within the definition, communication and enactment of the culture that employee engagement (action) and results (achievement) come together.

The desired results (what) of the culture may change least frequently. The strategy and tactics (how) for enacting that culture and the reasons (why) for those may require updating more often.

And no one holds more responsibility for defining (and refining) the business culture--on an ongoing and as needed basis--than the business leaders.

Photo Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/tambako/2515141429/

Comments

[Jim Haudan]

I was struck by this blog posting on employee engagement as an end result in itself. In business, we risk the danger of confusing goals and tools. This is why many corporate leaders dismiss employee engagement as non-strategic. There’s a clear difference between engagement and results. Here’s a good example.

In the late 1980s, the Malcolm Baldrige award was a very popular incentive for U.S. companies to improve quality on a global basis. It was a kind of “self-attack” for improvement – fix yourself before someone else renders you nonviable. But there was a large utility in the southern U.S. that was a Baldrige winner one year, enjoying all the acclaim for this great exhibition of excellence – and the very next year, they discontinued the process. Why would they do that? The answer was pretty simple. The tool had become the goal in their culture. Their goal had become “to win this award.” But if a business wins an award like this and loses business, it’s worse off than before they started!

This happens often with overzealous Six Sigma programs or anything else where the initiative isn’t seen as a critical ingredient of better business results but as the actual desired result. It’s the equivalent of the tail wagging the dog. What business fail to do is to be sure the tool – employee engagement – and the goal – business results – are in the right order. This confusion happens in at least half of the businesses we watch. You see it most when an HR department measures its success solely by the movement of engagement scores, and not the execution of strategy. It also happens because businesses fail to connect the engagement of people and desired business results. We measure engagement, but don’t attach it to its impact on business results and the marketplace.

Honestly, if employee engagement doesn’t lead to better business results, it’s not worth doing. And if you get great business results but have no employee engagement, your success is unlikely to be sustainable.

[Tim Wright]

Jim

Sounds like were pretty much in agreement.

Thanks for the comment.

Tim

[Derek Irvine]

I feel the same about employee recognition, which is just one tool that can help increase employee engagement. The end goal of strategic employee recognition is not to give an employee a trinket they may or may not value, but to give the employee a sense of value itself -- that they are valued by the company and their managers for their efforts, their contributions, their behavior. The end goal of recognition should be in motivating, inspiring and encouraging employees to achieve their personal best for the betterment of the team and the company.

Thanks for the very insightful post, Tim.