Employee engagement and organisation performance pres final2 inc polls slideshare

  • 472 views
Uploaded on

Slides from recent webinar on employee engagement. Large file - 7.5 Mb.

Slides from recent webinar on employee engagement. Large file - 7.5 Mb.

More in: Business , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
472
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
64
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. A full audio version of this webinar can be downloaded for free from:http://www.wtg-ondemand.com/detail_webinar.asp?spcomp=359 Nicholas J Higgins CEO, VaLUENTiS & Dean, Int’l School of HCM DrHCMI MSc Fin (LBS) MBA (OBS) MCMI WTG HR Webinar 17 May 2012 1
  • 2. A full audio version of this webinar can be downloaded for free from:http://www.wtg-ondemand.com/detail_webinar.asp?spcomp=359All rights reserved. No part of this presentation may be reproduced, translated, stored in aretrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,photocopying, microfilming recording or otherwise without the express permission of theauthor.Please e-mail nicholas.higgins@valuentis.com regarding any matters of reproduction.© 2012 2
  • 3. 3
  • 4. @ £9,000 per annum (see end) 4
  • 5. Models/Frameworks/Concepts used in the presentation 1. The ‘Six Pillars’ for successful 9. The ‘Management Pathfinder’ employee engagement (HCM15) 2. The ‘EE100’ 10. The ‘esE’ model (2 x 2) 3. An outcome based ‘EE definition’ 11. Question-Statement (QS) typology (ACP) design (or ‘how not to design’) 4. The ‘P12’ (modes of productivity) 12. The ‘Sears model’ (1994) 5. The ‘EESoF’ concept 13. The VaLUENTiS EE-scenario model 6. The ‘A-C’ Matrix (3 x 3) example (2008) (a.k.a. ‘αβγ’ matrix) 14. The ‘EE playbook’ 7. The VaLUENTiS 5D EE model 15. The ‘Broken Windows Hypothesis’ 8. The ‘POP’ system model reapplied 16. The ‘4-ball’ Organisation Practice model (‘Deal with the Real’) 5
  • 6. Employee Engagement ‘Starters for 10’(to be or not…)1. The term ‘employee engagement’ is used too broadly and inappropriately in too many cases (BE WARY)2. Optimising employee engagement (as defined) is a continual, relentless challenge (BE READY)3. There’s no ‘silver bullet’, ‘wave of the magic wand’, nor, for that matter, a ‘silver magic wand-bullet’ to improving employee engagement (BE REAL)4. With employee engagement, measurement/evaluation is fundamental (BE SMART)5. The responsibility for employee engagement lies with everybody in the organisation (BE MINDFUL)6. Organisations can only achieve high levels of employee engagement by doing the ‘basics’ constantly (and well) (BE RESILIENT)7. The people expertise (‘the right stuff’) of line management is the single biggest factor (BE IN NO DOUBT)8. The relationship between employee engagement and organisation performance is NOT linear, nor is it straightforward (BE OPEN-MINDED)9. Most organisations have a disjointed or incomplete approach to employee engagement (BE ADVISED)10. There are very few reported (if it all) cases of successful organisations with high employee engagement and high organisation performance over a period of time (in evidence-based terms) (BE CRITICAL) 6 6
  • 7. ‘Six pillars’ for successful employee engagement • Grounded understanding of EE • Working definition of EE • Measurement wisdom • Actioning infrastructure EE PLAYBOOK • Dynamic EE-Performance ‘playbook’ DELETE • Competent leadership/management 7 7© The Definitive Guide to Employee Engagement, Nicholas J Higgins & G Cohen, 2012, forthcoming
  • 8. IGroundedunderstanding ofemployeeengagement 8
  • 9. “Question: Employee Engagement - Where doyou start?”“Answer: At the beginning” 9
  • 10. Source: Question posed in VaLUENTiS ‘skunkworks’ output 2003 10 10
  • 11. 3 1 “Organisations were looking for a quick-win means of improving performance” 2 “Organisations were looking for a means to differentiate for hiring talent in PR terms”Source: Question posed in VaLUENTiS ‘skunkworks’ output 2003 11 11
  • 12. • Embed an optimised people-productivity culture • Attempt to mitigate against operational employment risk • Means to collectively ‘evaluate’ line management ‘competence’ /organisational HCM • Provide benchmark data on the ‘soft’ area of operations (quasi-audit) • Provide rationale and objective focus for management development programmes • Means of providing intelligence and/or empirical evidence used in conjunction with other organisation performance data Second order (derivative)rationale/spin-offs Source: Question posed in VaLUENTiS ‘skunkworks’ output 2003 12 12
  • 13. 1a Primary rationale‘say/do/evidence’ exercise 13
  • 14. 1b Secondary rationale‘say/do/evidence’ exercise 14
  • 15. WEBINAR POLL 1With regard to employee engagement, my organisation (select one only)is looking……for a means of improving performance …for a means to differentiate hiring talent in PR terms …to embed an optimised people-productivity culture …to mitigate against operational employment risk …for a means to collectively ‘evaluate’ line management‘competence’ …to provide benchmark data on the ‘soft’ area of operations  15
  • 16. Source: Follow-on question posed in VaLUENTiS ‘skunkworks’ 2003 16 16
  • 17. “There is nothing so practical as a good theory.”Kurt Lewin 17 17
  • 18. The concept of Employee Engagement: A synthesis of antecedent theories and empirical evidence with human capital management practice related to organisation performance – 100 years in the making •Leadership theory •Decision-making theory •Organisational ‘fit’ theory •Conflict theory •Organisation performance & measurement* •Commitment theory •Trust theory •High performance work systems •Goal setting and task theory •Teams theory •Group theory Human Capital Management practice/systems: •Expectancy theory •Talent management •Equity (justice) theory •Performance management •Motivation theory •Reward & recognition •Job satisfaction •Employer brand Individual Immediate Wider Organisation •Human capital retention •Needs theory Team Group •Resourcing & selection •Trait theory •Social cognitive/ •Training & Development self efficacy theory •Workforce diversity •Psychological contract •Leadership •Organisation Citizenship Behaviour •Organisation design •Taylor - Scientific management •Emotional Intelligence •Organisation communication •Munsterberg - Industrial psychology •Behaviourism •Organisation culture •Fayol - Principles of management •Cognitive dissonance •Follett - Management relations/integration •Learning theory •Mayo/Hawthorne studies •Wellbeing/Burnout •Lewin (MIT) - group dynamics/behaviour •Other I/O psychology •Likert – Management system/measurement scale contributions •Tavistock – Socio-technical systems •McGregor Theory X/Y •Hertzberg – Two factor theory •Drucker – Practice of management 18Source: The antecedents of Employee Engagement, Nicholas J Higgins - VaLUENTiS technical paper 2003 •Kahn – Personal engagement
  • 19. 1919
  • 20. IIWorkingdefinition ofemployeeengagement 20
  • 21. “Vision without execution is hallucination.”Thomas Edison 21 21
  • 22. “Employee engagement is an ‘outcome-based’ concept.It is the term used to describe thedegree to which employees can beascribed as ‘aligned’ and ‘committed’ toan organisation such that they are attheir most productive.”VaLUENTiS International School of HCM2005 22
  • 23. ‘Most productive’ meaning individuals are… More likely to More likely to More likely to produce higher achieve goals set embrace set grade/quality of values work (less errors) More likely to be More likely to give flexible to discretionary effort More likely to ‘own’ More inclined to More inclined toorganisation needs (if above contractual their development input into ideas/ share knowledge equitable) obligations innovation Less likely to suffer Less inclined to take Less likely to move stress Less likely to days off employer (but more likely to commit suffer burn-out) fraud/sabotage Known as the ‘P12 modes of productivity’… 23 23
  • 24. poorlycommunicatedreorganisation perceived short-staffed reward inequity interpersonal planned conflict training cancelled uncaring new incentive boss misalignmentenlarged role Well-received performance appraisal hit personal targets/ hit team objectives targets/ objectives salary enrolled on MD increase programme Employee engagement as a sum of constant work ‘forces’ (EESoF model) illustrative vectors 24 24
  • 25. Staff engagement: The challenge for organisations (The A-C Matrix) Fully congruent Knows what to do/achieve Could do Fully but unlikely to more productive achieve it “Only one box in nine reflects the constant ‘high bar’ Less than challenge for More likely to Individual’s optimally have Job gets done productive - organisations in degree of performance/ Could do more optimising Alignment capability issues ‘well’ engagement across the workforce on a Likely to have performance, More likely to daily basis” High probability of attitudinal have objective wasted effort/ and/or and/or ‘potential’ frustration behavioural issues Incongruent issues Continuance Degree of Affective Commitment © VaLUENTiS Ltd 2002-12 25 25
  • 26. Staff engagement: The challenge for organisations (The A-C Matrix) Fully congruent Knows what to do/achieve Could do Fully 5% but unlikely to 15% more 15% productive achieve it Less than More likely to Individual’s optimally have “Typical split” degree of 10% performance/ Job 25% gets done 10% productive - Could do more Alignment capability issues ‘well’ Likely to have performance, More likely to High probability of attitudinal have objective 10% and/or 5% and/or ‘potential’ 5% wasted effort/ frustration behavioural issues Incongruent issues Continuance Degree of Affective Commitment © VaLUENTiS Ltd 2002-12 26 26
  • 27. © VaLUENTiS Ltd 27 27
  • 28. Using a construct like the 5D (expanded) VaLUENTiS 5D Employee Engagement Framework Line-of-Sight Work Environment Objectives awareness Cultural elements Behaviour alignment Team dynamics Role ‘fit’ Communication Organisation operating Performance management culture Resources Feedback Local management Capability Physical environment Organisation design Performance/talent management Remuneration equity ‘Corporate’ Leadership Career progression Bonus/incentives Communication Competencies Decision rights Benefits Work values Succession planning Role equity Trust Job/ Role architecture Recognition Training/ Learning Promotional aspects Coaching/ Mentoring Reward (equity) Development © VaLUENTiS Ltd 2002-12 28 28
  • 29. Think back to the EE box with the‘underground map’ at the beginning…..The five domains plus the connectedorganisation performance aspect can bethought of as six sides of the cube with theirconnections resembling that similar to anunderground map 29
  • 30. 2 Organisation approach to definingemployee engagement exercise 30
  • 31. WEBINAR POLL 2With regard to defining/adopting employee (select one only)engagement, in my organisation……We researched a selection of empirical theories and distilled the essenceinto our definition through a structured process …We based our definition/understanding on one base theory but nostructured process followed …We adopted a definition ‘off- the-shelf’ that fits our view having gonethrough a structured process …We adopted a definition ‘off- the-shelf’ that fits our view but have not used astructured process …Not sure what process we followed …Don’t know/Haven’t done an exercise yet  31
  • 32. IIIMeasurementwisdom 32
  • 33. “If you cannot measure it, you cannot improve it.”Lord Kelvin 33 33
  • 34. The traditional view of employee engagement contributing to improved organisational performance... Higher Higher Higher employee organisation productivity engagement performance 34 34
  • 35. Human capital management practice andemployee engagement contributing to improved organisational performance (‘POP’ system) More effective human capital management Higher Higher organisation productivity performance Higher employee engagement 35 35
  • 36. However, remember the converse.....More ineffectivehuman capital management Lower Lower organisation productivity performance Lower employee engagement 36 36
  • 37. Using a construct like the 5D (expanded) VaLUENTiS 5D Employee Engagement Framework Line-of-Sight Work Environment Objectives awareness Cultural elements Behaviour alignment Team dynamics Role ‘fit’ Communication Organisation operating Performance management culture Resources Feedback Local management Capability Physical environment Organisation design Performance/talent management Remuneration equity ‘Corporate’ Leadership Career progression Bonus/incentives Communication Competencies Decision rights Benefits Work values Succession planning Role equity Trust Job/ Role architecture Recognition Training/ Learning Promotional aspects Coaching/ Mentoring Reward (equity) Development © VaLUENTiS Ltd 2002-12 37
  • 38. The concept of Employee Engagement: A synthesis of antecedent theories and empirical evidence with human capital management practice related to organisation performance – 100 years in the making •Leadership theory •Decision-making theory •Organisational ‘fit’ theory •Conflict theory •Organisation performance & measurement* •Commitment theory •Trust theory •High performance work systems •Goal setting and task theory •Teams theory •Group theory Human Capital Management practice/systems: •Expectancy theory •Talent management •Equity (justice) theory •Performance management •Motivation theory •Reward & recognition •Job satisfaction •Employer brand Individual Immediate Wider Organisation •Human capital retention •Needs theory Team Group •Resourcing & selection •Trait theory •Social cognitive/ •Training & Development self efficacy theory •Workforce diversity •Psychological contract •Leadership •Organisation Citizenship Behaviour •Organisation design •Taylor - Scientific management •Emotional Intelligence •Organisation communication •Munsterberg - Industrial psychology •Behaviourism •Organisation culture •Fayol - Principles of management •Cognitive dissonance •Follett - Management relations/integration •Learning theory •Mayo/Hawthorne studies •Wellbeing/Burnout •Lewin (MIT) - group dynamics/behaviour •Other I/O psychology •Likert – Management system/measurement scale contributions •Tavistock – Socio-technical systems •McGregor Theory X/Y •Hertzberg – Two factor theory •Drucker – Practice of management 38Source: The antecedents of Employee Engagement, Nicholas J Higgins - VaLUENTiS technical paper 2003 •Kahn – Personal engagement
  • 39. VaLUENTiS VB-HR Rating Level 2:Management Pathfinder TRAINING & DIVERSITY DEVELOPMENT TALENT EMPLOYEE MANAGEMENT 813 CENTRICITY EMPLOYER REWARD BRAND 674 599 416 657 615 HR RETENTION GOVERNANCE 742 431 684 487 HR RESOURCING 642 OPERATIONAL 603 594 EXCELLENCE 628 ‘Out-performing’ (world class) ‘Out-performing’ PERFORMANCE LEADERSHIP (peer) ORIENTATION ‘Comparable’ 796 (peer) ORGANISATION ORGANISATION ‘Under-performing’ DESIGN CLIMATE (peer) ORGANISATION 39 39 COMMUNICATIONS
  • 40. The employee survey expertise modelHIGHHCM subject matter expertise Myopic 20/20 Foresight Result: Result: organisation has misleading or erroneous sufficient in-depth, robust interpretation knowledge to act upon Blind Unfocused Result: end up with ‘garbage in- Limited insight due to limitations garbage out’ syndrome of HCM knowledge Survey instrument design & measurement expertiseLOW HIGH 40 © ISHCM 2006 40
  • 41. The employee survey expertise model (‘reality at the front’)HIGH HCM subject matter expertise Myopic 20/20 Foresight 16% 8% Blind Unfocused 51% 25% Survey instrument design & measurement expertiseLOW HIGH 41 41 Sample: 147 employee surveys. All organisations with over 750 employees. ISHCM research team. Study carried out 2006-7
  • 42. X-axis: (part example) Q-S design errortypology for reference purposes I. Leading questions II. Double barrelled/multiple questions III. Knowledge or projection (proxy) IV. Response extremity V. Responses open to social desirability/prestige VI. Responses implying causality VII. Questions that impose unwarranted assumptions VIII. Questions that include hidden contingencies IX. Questions that include ambiguous time periods X. Questions containing concepts that are open to differing interpretation XI. Question that duplicates another or is a reverse of another XII. Questions requiring a tendency to acquiesce and/or imply ‘psychological threat or hostility XIII. Questions that are exclusively positively or exclusively negatively clustered XIV. Questions which are culturally loaded and or overly long 42 42 Source: VaLUENTiS QS methodology 2003
  • 43. 4343
  • 44. 3 Parameter ‘say/do/evidence’ exercise 44
  • 45. 4 Employee Engagement constructparameters exercise 45
  • 46. Before we move on….…• Consider an organisation that prepares its accounts but doesn’t know how to measure its profit (or loss)….• Would you consider this organisation to be a. Competent? b. Incompetent?• I know of no case studies detailing such a chronic failure.• Now consider organisations who conduct employee surveys but have no idea of what they’re actually measuring, particularly ‘engagement’….• Would you consider these organisations to be a. Competent? b. Incompetent?• I have witnessed many cases. 46
  • 47. A look back at The original Sears ‘system’ model… Employee Revenue Retention GrowthInternal Employee External Customer Customerservice Satisfaction Service Satisfaction Loyalty quality Value Employee Profitability Productivity Putting the Service-Profit chain to work Heskett, Jones, Loveman, Sasser Jr & Schlesinger Harvard Business Review Mar-Apr 1994 47
  • 48. Moving on from the Sears model…the EE scenario analytic models Example ‘Macro’ model NHS version 1.20 Leadership Leadership Trust Shareholder Employer Employer && performance value brand brand governance governance Human Human Work values Safety Work values Portfolio mix Capital Capital External Line - of -sight Clinicalselling External Patient Customer Quality of Revenue Practices Practices Line - of -sight X - treatment Satisfaction Satisfaction services Growth Development Staff Employee Individual/ Patient focus Development Individual/ Service Value Engagement Engagement team Value Reward Reward team Prompt service Portfolio mix Productivity Productivity Proposition Patient Work environment Work environment Environment Proposition Customer Use of Resources X - selling experience Profitability Loyalty Community Service Staff Employee Retention Retention Compliance Compliance ‘Local’ ‘Local’ Management Management Cost control Cost control© VaLUENTiS VBM Analytics methodology 2008-12 48
  • 49. Moving on from the Sears model…The EE operational model ‘data cube’ 49
  • 50. The EE organisational model ‘data megacube’ 50
  • 51. IVActioningInfrastructure 51
  • 52. “Face reality as it is, not as it was, or as you wish it to be.”Jack Welch 52 52
  • 53. Employee Engagement - Actioning Infrastructure 1 4 2 3 53
  • 54. Actioning Infrastructure (Purpose: ‘to embed’)1. Supportive top leadership and ‘signalling’2. ‘Interactive’ People management evaluation process map3. Multi-survey mapping and planning overlay (x-connect)4. EE related development /learning programmes & workshops5. People Manager evaluation/appraisal (regular ‘practice runs’)6. Defined ‘how to’ strategies around engagement elements7. ‘Live’ Employee Engagement adapted QFD (‘House of Quality’)8. Dedicated internal focus team or nominated ‘on-point’ person9. Nominated People Manager Engagement champions10.Organisation event logs11.Links into wider organisation intelligence analytics12.Wider communications/branding 54
  • 55. Example from the field:Continuous NHS staff and patient survey process (The PULSAR® design) Sample for Sample for macro DoH macro DoH research research Normally conducted in 2-week windows against selected samples Annual staff survey Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Annual staff survey ‘pulse’ ‘pulse’ ‘pulse’ across full Trust sample sample sample across full Trust ...... population (census) surveys surveys surveys population Multivariate phase analysis Multivariate phase analysis Multivariate phase analysis Multivariate phase analysis Multivariate phase analysis Synchronous phase reporting to assist in improving care/embedding engagement in Trusts linking to clinical, quality, management and financial outcomes - see VaLUENTiS NHS Floodlight System™ for example Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly patient patient patient patient patient ‘pulse’ ‘pulse’ ‘pulse’ ‘pulse’ ‘pulse’ ...... reporting reporting reporting reporting reporting Continuous collection of patient feedback reported in quarterly ‘pulses’ Sample for Sample for macro DoH *Can be selected at any nominated point macro DoH feedback * feedback 55 Source: Conducting staff and patient surveys in the NHS: A world class solution, VaLUENTiS white paper
  • 56. VDynamic EE-Performance‘playbook’ 56
  • 57. The ‘Definitive EE’ Playbook P E R Leadership Goal alignment F Team development O R M Work environment A NPerformance Cappraisal Managing Incentives E conflict Role design 57 57
  • 58. EE playbook content Contents Strategies 1. Engagement strategies 2. Engagement operating ‘system’ models and analytics templates 3. Question-statement selection and construct Models design 4. Measurement index construction, maintenance and reporting 5. Engagement Driver Factor (EDF) analysis Implementation 6. Engagement ‘forcefield’ analysis 7. EE project management methodology and flowcharts 8. Engagement ‘issue work-through’ tools 9. Management learning programme design and evaluative criteria Learning 10. Engagement Transformation Programme (ETP) methodology 11. Core applied theory summary capsules 12. Human Capital Management framework 4 EE playbook 58 58
  • 59. 5 Employee Engagement: Organisationreality exercise 59
  • 60. VICompetentleadership/management 60
  • 61. “Management is doing things right. Leadership is doing the right things”Peter Drucker 61 61
  • 62. Engagement responses: Scoring high ‘The Good The OK and •Work and sense of personal accomplishment •Pride in working for the organisation •Opportunity to utilise skills The Ugly’ •Adequate training to perform the job •Personal values/company values aligned •Honesty and integrity in business activities •Accurate evaluation of performance in last appraisal Scoring midrange •Physical working environment •Adequate resources to work effectively •Company values visible in the day-to-day activities of my team •Receiving recognition for doing a good job •Understanding how to get promoted •Equity of being paid compared with others in organisation Scoring low •Company doing a good job in providing opportunities for advancement •Well-being of employees when management make important decisions •Senior management in touch with everyday issues •Equity of being paid compared with others in other companies who hold similar jobs •Clear communication of rationale behind promotion and career developmentSource: VaLUENTiS Engagement database, collated since 2004 62 62Please note: Actual Question-statements paraphrased for the purposes of this slide
  • 63. Management – just how many have a ‘license’ to manage....?• Managers are significantly under-qualified compared to other professional occupations: 41% of managers hold below a Level 2 qualification…….• …..Just 38.5% of managers and senior officials are qualified at level 4 and above, compared to 80.9% of those in other professional occupations.”• “It is estimated that the proportion of managers with management-related qualifications will not get much above 20 per cent in the longer term at the current rate of achievement……..• ….. The literature review revealed that there is a growing body of evidence showing the impact of not only management skills but management qualifications on productivity.” Source: The Value of Management Qualifications, Chartered Management Institute 2007 63 63
  • 64. Leadership & Management ‘reality gap’ – hot off the press....(confirming what is already known)• “According to the CIPD’s research1, 72% of employers report a deficit of leadership and management skills. However, the CIPD’s quarterly Employee Outlook survey of 2,000 employees, released today, also suggests that one problem in tackling this skills deficit is that many managers don’t know how bad they are at managing people.”• “Eight out of ten managers say they think their staff are satisfied or very satisfied with them as a manager whereas just 58% of employees report this is the case. This ‘reality gap’ matters as the survey finds a very clear link between employees who say they are satisfied or very satisfied with their manager and those that are engaged – i.e. willing to go the extra mile for their employer.” Source: Press release, Chartered Institute of Personnel & Development May 2012 1CIPD/Cornerstone ‘Learning & Talent Development Survey 2012’ 64 64
  • 65. 910 ‘Line Management’ engagement score by 860 percentile 813 790 760 Management cadre sample 2010-11 Sample size: 1400 managers representing 20,000 employees 65 65Source: VaLUENTiS Engagement database Score range 200-1000
  • 66. ‘Line Management’ engagement scores ‘bell curve’ Management cadre sample 2010-11 Sample size: 1400 managers (employee population: 20,000) Score range 200-1000 14.5% below 1sd 13.9% above 1sd 200 738 1000 66 66Source: VaLUENTiS Engagement database
  • 67. The ‘Broken Windows’ hypothesisThe theory states that monitoring and maintaining urbanenvironments in a well-ordered condition may stop furthervandalism as well as an escalation into more serious crime. Applied to engagement… The theory states that monitoring and maintaining work environments in a well-ordered management condition may stop further engagement erosion as well as an escalation into more serious disengagement issues. 67 67
  • 68. Employee Engagement: Good people managers versus average managers.........Good managers ...Average/poor managers High probability of: High probability/tendency of:1. Being self-aware (score well on EI) 1. Limited self-awareness2. Treating staff as the organisation’s ,not their own 2. Treating staff as their own resource rather than ‘little army’ organisation’s3. Being pro-active, forward looking and confident no 3. Being reactive, backward-looking and/or display matter the situation uncertainty on too many occasions4. Being knowledgeable of (successful) people- 4. Being limited in their understanding of people management approaches management5. Understanding the importance of clear one-to-one 5. Their communication too often being seen as vague or communication and being consistent inconsistent when interacting with staff6. Getting results but not at the expense (or over- 6. Get results but tend to have higher absenteeism or reliance on good performers) turnover of staff7. Making tough calls when required for the benefit of 7. Deferring tough calls, preferring to political expediency the team even at the expense of others8. Don’t postpone/move important events such as 8. History of postponing or procrastinating on individual individual reviews/appraisals etc events such as individual reviews/appraisals9. Understanding that most managerial decision-making 9. Limited awareness of or disregard the equity principle is about equity in people situations/issues when making managerial decisions10. Taking a natural interest in people development 10. Show little interest in individual development save for above the mandatory level mandatory skill requirements11. Challenging team performance in different ways 11. See team management as a ‘chore’12. View management role as a ‘privilege’, not a right 12. View management role as a ‘right’, not a privilege 68 68
  • 69. The ‘people competency’ of line management – the organisation view.........common problems ...’fixes’• Lack of understanding across managers as to • Clear communicated framework of good people what good people management is and its management practice together with learning impact exposure• Varied mix of line managers with variation in • Utilise management competency platform with people practice and resulting issues structured programme of learning and assessments• No set bar to becoming line ‘people manager’, • Adopt ‘license to manage’ standard with i.e. no ‘license to manage’ appropriate hurdles and gradings• Too many ‘B’-players in managerial positions • Instigate talent assessment where necessary, who limit employee engagement potential with career option route-paths including exit• Too often, HR as ‘personnel function’ • Assess if issue relates to cultural expectations, compensates for deficiencies vague HR role definition/value proposition or all three, in conjunction with above actions 69 69
  • 70. 6 Management fix-implementation exercise 70
  • 71. WEBINAR POLL 3In my organisation, there is… (select those appropriate)…a lack of understanding across managers as to what good peoplemanagement is and its impact …a varied mix of line managers with variation in people practice and resultingissues …No set bar to becoming line ‘people manager’, i.e. no ‘license to manage’ …Too many ‘B’-players in managerial positions who limit employeeengagement potential …NO problem with people management expertise across our cohort ofmanagers …no comment due to lack of information/insight  71
  • 72. Postscript 72
  • 73. “Things should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.”Albert Einstein 73 73
  • 74. Organisations and employee engagement: The ‘4-ball’ practice model ‘We don’t...’ ‘It’s all about PR…’ Play down Play act ‘At least we audit/ benchmark...’ Play safe ‘We do it…’ The four progressive states of Play make employee engagement embeddedness in organisations© The Definitive Guide to Employee Engagement, Nicholas J Higgins & G Cohen, 2012, forthcoming 74 74
  • 75. The ‘4-ball’ EE practice model matrix (expanded)Pillar ‘PLAY DOWN’ ‘PLAY ACT’ ‘PLAY SAFE’ ‘PLAY MAKE’ Grounded I Exists in pockets with Good working knowledge understanding of Limited. Little. variation in line embedded across employee engagement Mostly ephemeral in nature. management. organisation. Maybe borrowed with II Working definition of Most likely borrowed Distributed ‘ownership’, internalisation or adapted employee engagement No definition in use. without any real ownership, whether borrowed, adapted after some organisational or ‘false’ ownership. or created. focus. Probably undertaking Will do measurement basics, People managementIII Limited to absenteeism Measurement wisdom surveys but with no valid even to the extent of evaluation/measurement metrics, employee surveys construct; response rate/PR engagement index etc. seen as ‘core’ on a par with seen as event driven if done. main focus. Tick box is main focus. CRM , finance etc. Probably in the form of basic Will have a number of Will have necessary ‘toolkit’IV Probably in the form of basic Actioning management courses. Most actioning elements in place to hand with ongoing training/management Infrastructure likely carry out some form of but not necessarily joined programmes to suit courses. branded programme. up. organisation focus. May have something Playbook in the form of Easy access in different e- V EE-Performance Playbook Does not exist. articulated on ‘strategies’. Most likely collection of ‘manager manual’ or on-line knowledge-share. Still being /physical formats at different levels. Signals irrelevant case studies. developed. ‘embedded’ intent. Will have varied mix of Will have varied mix of Will have varied mix of Cohort of well-trainedVI Competent leadership/ management skilled people managers. Existing good performers skilled people managers. Existing good performers skilled people managers but level of competency higher people managers exists with talent pools. Regular more through luck. more through luck. than Play-Act organisations. evaluation/reinforcement.Overall value to organisationperformance/competitive NEGATIVE NEGATIVE NEUTRAL POSITIVEadvantage 75
  • 76. WEBINAR POLL 4Given the matrix definitions and attributes, I would say (select one only)my organisation most resembles a……’PLAY-MAKER’ …’PLAY-SAFER’ …’PLAY-ACTOR’ …’PLAY-DOWNER’  76
  • 77. ‘Six pillars’ for successful employee engagement (to recap) • Grounded understanding of EE • Working definition of EE • Measurement wisdom • Actioning infrastructure EE PLAYBOOK • Dynamic EE-Performance ‘playbook’ DELETE • Competent leadership/management 77 77© The Definitive Guide to Employee Engagement, Nicholas J Higgins & G Cohen, 2012, forthcoming
  • 78. @ £9,000 per annum 78
  • 79. That’s what our clients, on average, save each year due to our focus onoutcome not over-focus on process! 79
  • 80. 80
  • 81. Nicholas J Higginsnicholas.higgins@valuentis.comVaLUENTiS Ltd, 2nd Floor, Berkeley Square House,Berkeley Square, London W1J 6BDHO: +44 (0)207 887 6108M: +44 (0)7811 404713www.valuentis.comwww.ISHCM.comwww.HCglobal.blogspot.com 81
  • 82. Smart. Smarter. Smartest... Professional Services www.valuentis.com‘The leading human capital management specialists’ ‘PEOPLE SCIENCE®’ Organisation Intelligence to improve organisation performance • Human Capital Management Evaluation • Employee Engagement • Talent Management • Workforce Productivity & Performance • Predictive Analytics • HC Forensics & Risk • HR Function ROI Analysis • Organisation Measurement • Management Education • Organisation Strategy SOLUTIONS 82