Downloaded 19 times
Uploaded byebbnflow
Evidence Based Employee Engagement Slide Show.pptx
The document discusses the complexities of employee engagement, emphasizing the importance of valid constructs in measuring and improving it within organizations. It explores various definitions and theories related to engagement, outlines the drivers of both disengagement and engagement, and critiques composite scoring methods. Overall, it advocates for an evidence-based approach to understand and enhance employee engagement effectively.
More Related Content
Similar to Evidence Based Employee Engagement Slide Show.pptx
Evidence Based Employee Engagement Slide Show.pptx
- 1. Making Sense ofEmployee Survey Data An Evidenced Based Approach Join the conversation 11-12pm 20th May 2022 This talk is aimed at HR & Organisational Development professionals to help them navigate their employee surveys & find out more about their future Presented by Alex Boulting
- 3. Who am I& Why me ? MEMBER – MINSTLM FELLOW – CIPD
- 4.
- 5. Are we withemployee engagement? WHERE? 1
- 6. Construct = anabstract categorisation of observations - exist only in our brain ;) This is not a pipe The Treachery of Employee Engagement
- 7. Is this aValid Construct…? COHERENCE Definition + Scope + Relationship = Coherence and CONSTRUCT VALIDITY. How can we claim to measure & improve if we don’t have a valid construct? RELATIONSHIP No construct is an island so how does engagement relate to Self Determination, Goal Setting, Psychological Safety, Organisational Justice, Trust in Leadership, Autonomy, Efficacy, Resilience, ‘Good Work’ etc SCOPE Which one - happiness, motivation, energy, effort, commitment, shared purpose, taking pride in the organisation and job satisfaction DEFINITION Precise distinctions from other concepts. Employee Engagement = “when employees are engaged with their jobs” – a circular tautology or clear definition? 50 definitions! Suddaby, R. 2010. Construct clarity in theories of management and organization. Academy of Management Review, 35: 346-357.
- 8. 50 different definitions! Is it a… •Behaviour e.g. discretionary effort •Attitude e.g. commitment •Feeling e.g. enthusiasm •Condition of work e.g. support (Gallup Q12)
- 9. NPS was conceivedby customer loyalty consultant Fred Reicheld in 2003 & is calculated by subtracting ‘detractors’ from ‘promoters’. With little robust empirical research, it was soon adopted by large corporates & advocated by HBR (“The One Number You Need To Grow”). Because NPS or word of mouth (WOM) is trying to measure so many variables it is hard to link it to revenue growth. Engagement isn’t eNPS
- 10. Happy with workconditions Engaged Employees Started as workplace conditions audit (Gallup Workplace Audit) in 1992 Drivers of Disengagement Drivers of Engagement Disengaged Engaged Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Keyes, C. L. (2003). Well-being in the workplace and its relationship to business outcomes: A review of the Gallup studies. “Undermining engaged employees” “Drive high performance & innovation” Productive Workers Engaged Employees What does say ?
- 11. What does say? • Self Determination Theory • Psychological Safety • Goal Setting • Management Support • Workload • Recognition Reward • Organisational Fit • Strategy • Progress Principle • ‘Learning Culture’ • Meaningful Work • eNPS Valid Measures ?
- 12. “In less technicalterms, we can say that even if they are all of interest, averaging distinct measures into an overarching score does not produce any magic. If we bundle disparate things together, we get a potpourri or mosh-pit of metrics: so much is going on that we can’t really interpret it. “ CIPD 2021 ‘…the most common way to measure engagement is by a group of survey items that include measures of satisfaction, effort, and commitment to the organisation; in other words, a potpourri of items looking at different types of attitudes that have different relationships to performance.’ Lawler 2013 Issues with Composite Scores
- 13. So what? “Nearly 85%of employees worldwide are still not engaged or are actively disengaged at work, despite more effort from companies”. – GALLUP 2021
- 14. Is Employee EngagementImportant? WHY? 2
- 15. 1950s 1960s 1980s 1970s1990s 2000s 2010s 2020s 1940s From Kurt Lewin (1943) to Paul Lawrence (1958) change and organisational development is conceived as a set of causal relationships within a ‘social system’ built on scientific constructs. Allport (1937) ‘functional autonomy’ & Maslow’s (1943) ‘general dynamic theory’ integrate psychological & physiological approaches to human motivation. White 1959 uses the words ‘competence & efficacy’ to describe the human need to ‘‘learn to interact effectively with his environment’ Forrester (1961) - publishes Industrial Dynamics which views organisations as complex systems. Burns & Stalker (1961) – find that less structured organisations can better adapt to dynamic environments 1965 Emery & Trist view organisations as ‘open systems’ responding to ‘environmental textures’ Katz & Kahn (1966) develop an ‘open-system theory’ of organisations. Current robust OD constructs emerge such as Dansereau’s (1973) – Leader Member Exchange, Bandura 1977 – Self- Efficacy & Gouldner, 1960 (Reciprocity) Social Exchange Theory Brief history of organisational change & development Meta Analysis & Myth Busting Scientific Approach to OD Complex Systems Approach to OD Explosion of OD constructs OD constructs consolidated into more general theories such as Ryan & Deci (1985) Self Determination Theory, Theory of Planned Behaviour Lock & Latham (1988) Goal Setting while new theories emerge such as Kahn (1990) Psychological Safety & Employee Engagement, Weick’s (1995) Organisational Sensemaking help to build the foundations of modern OD thinking. Meta analysis techniques help to create robust OD constructs such as Self-Efficacy (Stajkovic & Luthans-1998), Organisational Justice (Colquitt et al 2013) Trust in Leadership (Dirks & Ferrin - 2002), Psychological Safety (Frazier et al 2017) Academics start to question the foundations of traditional organisational OD models e.g., Hughes (2015) critiques Kotter & Cummings et al (2015) questions the Lewin’s UCF theory Dennis Tourish ( 2019) ‘Authentic’ Leadership, Rob Briner Employee Engagement (2015) Mcgregor’s (1957) X-Y theory ‘operationalises’ Maslow’s theory
- 16. 02 Rudolf Kalman –1963 – Control Theory 1st Principle of Complex Systems - ENERGY ‘tension’ as a readiness for action or motivating force or energy which is created by a need (motive) that is released once that need is met Kurt Lewin – 1943 – Field Theory “We could say a system is controllable if we can drive it from any initial state to any desired final state in finite time” “The complex system has a multiplicity of interacting feedback loops. Its internal rates of flow are controlled by nonlinear relationships” Jay Forrester – 1961 – Industrial Dynamics 01 03
- 17. William Kahn Kahn (1990)Psychological Safety & Employee Engagement Psychological meaningfulness can be seen as a feeling that one is receiving a return on investments of one's self in a currency of physical, cognitive, or emotional energy behaviors by which people bring in (engagement) or leave out (disengagement) their personal selves during work role performances. I defined personal engagement as the harnessing of organization members' selves to their work roles; in engagement This formulation reflects concepts of how people invest themselves in tasks (Hackman & Oldham, 1980) “ ”
- 18. Numerosity Disorder & Diversity Feedback Non-equilibrium 18 10characteristics of Complex Systems Spontaneous order and Self organisation Non-linearity Robustness Nested Structure & modularity History & memory Adaptive behaviour Emergence Ladyman, J., & Wiesner, K. (2020). What is a complex system?. Yale University Press.
- 19. Does the evidencesay about employee engagement? WHAT…? 3
- 20. Evidence Review ofDefinitions Framework Number of Studies Balance of Demands (-ive) & Resources (+ive) (JD-R model) 65 Employees exert effort if they are treated well (Social Exchange Theory) 26 Acquire and preserve resources (energy) (Conservation of Resources Theory) 14 Individuals experience positive emotions (Broaden & Build Theory) 8 Bailey, C., Madden, A., Alfes, K., Fletcher, L., Robinson, D., Holmes, J., ... & Currie, G. (2015). Evaluating the evidence on employee engagement and its potential benefits to NHS staff: a narrative synthesis of the literature. Health Services and Delivery Research, 3(26), 1-424.
- 21. A definition? • Vigoris characterized by high levels of energy and mental resilience while working, the willingness to invest effort in one’s work, and persistence even in the face of difficulties. • Dedication refers to being strongly involved in one’s work and experiencing a sense of significance, enthusiasm, inspiration, pride, and challenge. • Absorption is characterized by being fully concentrated and happily engrossed in one’s work, whereby time passes quickly and one has difficulties with detaching oneself from work.
- 22. ENGAGEMENT At my work,I feel bursting with energy I am enthusiastic about my job I am immersed in my work I successfully manage a high workload for long periods of time RESILIENCE BURNOUT I feel tired when I get up in the morning & have to face another day at work I am at the end of my patience at the end of my workday. I’m afraid that this job is making me uncaring. DOES ENGAGEMENT = Physical + Emotional + Cognitive ENERGY ? A readiness to do work (but no necessarily Employee Engagement ;) WELLBEING I have felt active and vigorous I have felt cheerful and in good spirits My daily life has been filled with things that interest me Spot the difference? Maslach Burnout Inventory Employee Resilience Scale WHO 5 Utrecht Work Engagement Scale
- 23. A broader definition… A WorkMotivation C Employee’s sense of belonging to the organisation Organisational Identification B Organisational Commitment Wietrak, E., Rousseau, D. and Barends, E. (2021) Work motivation, Organisational Identification & Organisational Commitment : an evidence review. Scientific summary. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. Goal Setting Feedback Person- Organisational Fit Organisational Prestige A+B+C Employee Engagement Recognition Rewards Meaning Empowerment Social Support Psychological Safety Task & Skill Variety Energy levels within the organisation. Employee emotional attachment to the organisation Employee energy to do work & attain a goal Role Clarity Leadership : Trust & Positive Relationships Organisational Justice Belonging Uniqueness Affective Commitment
- 24. Building an InclusiveCulture Differentiation Exclusion Assimilation Individual is not treated as an organisational insider in the work group, but their unique characteristics are seen as valuable and required for group/organisational success Individual is not treated as an organisational insider with unique value in the work group but there are other employees or groups who are insiders Individual is treated as an insider in the work group when the conform to the organisational/dominant culture norms and downplay uniqueness UNIQENESS – Drive to stand out BELONGING - Drive to fit in (Cohesion) Shore, Lynn & Randel, Amy & Chung, Beth & Dean, Michelle & Ehrhart, Karen & Singh, Gangaram. (2011). Inclusion and Diversity in Work Groups: A Review and Model for Future Research. Journal of Management. Inclusive cultures are those where uniqueness and belonging come together When an individual’s unique characteristics are accepted into a group it improves performance while creating a sense of belonging These feelings of psychological safety where people feel safe taking interpersonal risks are critical to building inclusive cultures (Separation) Inclusion Individual is treated as an insider and allowed/encouraged to retain uniqueness within the work group .
- 25.
- 26. Do we bringit all together & move forward? HOW…? 4
- 27. 2 OCCATM - OURTHEORY OF CHANGE WORK CONTRACT WORK-LIFE BALANCE EMPLOYEE VOICE JOB DESIGN RELATIONSHIPS WELLBEING IMPACT OUTPUTS INPUTS GOAL SETTING PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY FAIRNESS CHANGE CAPABILITY FEEDBACK
- 28.
- 29. 2 OCCA Introduction UNIQUENESS Drive toflourish DOING External Perspective BELONGING– Drive to belong BEING Internal Perspective Behaviour is manifested as a decision to act which clearly impacts change momentum & direction. Connects individual intentions, beliefs, emotions & assumptions to action What I Do & How I Do It Habitualised behaviours have a high symbolic impact on change through organisational structures, processes & systems. Connects individual behaviours to an organisation’s purpose. What We Do & How We Do It Social context interprets beliefs & behaviours in relation to others creating wide cultural meaning of change. Connects individual’s identity to organisational culture. Why We Do & What We Experience Cognitive contemplation of how deep the individual’s commitment to change is. Connects to an individual's intentions, beliefs, emotions & assumptions Why I Do & What I Experience
- 30. Creating an inclusiveculture Individual Identity Organisational Identity Reflecting on behaviour Express identity ‘I’ ‘ME’ Habits embed culture Cultural understanding ‘WE’ ‘US’ UNIQUENESS Drive to flourish DOING – External Perspective BELONGING– Drive to belong BEING – Internal Perspective
- 31. 3 COMPLEX SYSTEMS… CANBE SIMPLIFIED HOW IT WORKS - Once we know the target culture Low Score High Priority High Impact
- 32. 2 2 5 4 1 1 3 4 1 1 3 1 1 SELF – Drive toflourish OTHERS – Drive to belong DOING – External Perspective BEING – Internal Perspective AUTHOR OF MY LIFE LEARNING ORGANISATION UNLEASHING POTENTIAL PURPOSE DRIVEN Blind spot on individual wellbeing & D&I (values & beliefs) Lots of questions but not capturing collaboration 80% or more of respondents Overall Positive Between 50 - 80% of respondents Overall Positive Example Audit
- 33. 33 MODEL FOR BUILDINGTRUST TRUST = Consideratio n & Structure Psychological Contract Breach Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of applied psychology, 87(4), 611.
- 34. Precontemplation I won’t orI can’t Contemplation I might Preparation I will Action I am Realise ‘small wins’ to build belief Embed and habitualise change behaviours Understand the need & readiness for change Develop compelling vision & leadership capability Implement evidence-based interventions Support enabling practices & structures Maintenance I still am Individual Change Process Organisational Change Process PULSE PULSE PULSE PULSE Creating high performing cultures Operational level Strategic level
- 35. SOLUTIONEERING The problem isnot that we don’t have a solution. The problem is we don’t know what the problem is.
- 36. REVIEW 6 5 2 4 1 3 SHARE stories ofwhat did(n’t) work INTERVENE Select & run interventions based on best available evidence SURVEY – cast the net wide using valid constructs DO PLAN PRIORITISE improvements given strategy, scores & feedback PULSE priorities to test intervention effectiveness CONSULT stakeholders on results to understand context 6 Top Tips for Employee Engagement Need to think of (dis)engagement as temporarily & we are continually understanding how the context we are creating helps people to fulfil their & the organisations potential
- 37. 6 Benefits ofBeing Evidence-Based Clarity & robustness of decision-making allows organisations to quickly respond to external challenges . AGILITY 01 as it creates a process to understand & interrogate decision-making CONFIDENCE 06 because decision-making processes have integrity & gravitas TRUST 02 Creates transparency & objectivity around decision- making FAIRNESS 05 clear decision-making structures creates efficacy, agency & autonomy EMPOWERMENT 03 to organisational values such as respect & fairness CONGRUENCE 04
- 38. AND ... Thank you! fromAlex Boulting Owner | ebbnflow +44 7562570000 alex@ebbnflow.co.u k www.ebbnflow.co.u k Stay tuned and check our newest videos on YouTube: