|
|||
|
|
|
||||||
|
A Failure to Inspire
A Towers Perrin survey finds most workers are not engaged in their jobs -- and that translates to lower productivity and decreased retention. Among other suggestions, experts say companies need to treat workers as if they matter and not as cogs in the machinery of the workplace.
Most of the world's workers are just not into their jobs. And it's not pay or benefits they blame, it's senior management's failure to inspire them or show an interest in their well-being. Only 21 percent of 88,600 workers surveyed online in 18 countries are "engaged," or emotionally invested, in their jobs, according to the 2007 Global Workforce Study just released by Towers Perrin, a New York-based global professional services firm. More than one-third (38 percent) of the surveyed workers, who are employed by mid- to large-sized firms, are either disenchanted or completely disengaged. U.S. workers had the third highest level of engagement, at 29 percent; Mexico had the highest rate, at 54 percent; and Japan, the lowest, at 3 percent. The gap between what employees are willing to invest in their work and their company's ability to tap into it -- what Towers Perrin calls the "engagement gap" -- spells trouble for the corporate bottom line. In a separate three-year study of companies in 40 countries, Towers Perrin found a correlation between employee engagement and financial success. Companies with the most engaged employees showed a 3.7 percent increase in operating margins and a 2 percent rise in net profits, while companies with less engagement had a decline in both measures. "Organizations ... are not getting the discretionary effort they need from their people to drive their performance and growth agendas, and it's hurting both their top and bottom lines," says Julie Gebauer, managing director and leader of Towers Perrin's Workforce Effectiveness consulting practice. Most surprisingly, say researchers, is that a worker's level of engagement does not appear to be an innate trait, but is driven by the organization -- especially senior management. They found that three factors drive employee engagement: whether senior management inspires them and is interested in their well-being; whether they are given the opportunity to improve their skills; and their organization's reputation for corporate responsibility. For example, of the engaged workers in the survey, about 80 percent believe they contribute to the quality of products and services, twice the level of disengaged workers. Half of the engaged employees had no plans to leave their companies, compared with 15 percent of the disengaged, and one-third of the overall work force. "We like [the term] engagement. We think it's a strong predictor of a company's performance," says Max Caldwell, managing principal with Towers Perrin. "There's also a deeper definition ... 'Do I feel inspired to do what I do?' ... What makes individuals want to give more to work? It's about discretionary effort. Top companies know how to say, 'Give us 10 percent more.' " While academicians have varying definitions for engagement, in the HR world, the willingness of workers to go the extra mile has become a measure of whether an employee will stay with the company long term. "[Engagement] is a huge issue. It is replacing [job] satisfaction. ... Somebody may be extremely interested in their work, but if they come up low in emotional engagement with the company and its culture, they won't stay with you," says Helen Solomons, an adjunct professor with the Human Resource Development program at Villanova University in Villanova, Pa. Engagement has become an important retention tool, Solomons says, especially as companies try to keep older, baby-boomer employees from leaving, and taking their skills and experience with them. The Towers Perrin findings are consistent with other studies, she says. "When [researchers] ask people, 'Are you producing at the level you could be?', the majority say, 'No.' ... They say they can't become engaged because of the way they are managed. ... When the values [of an organization] don't match those of the employee, you can be sure in a year or two they'll be gone." Michael Leiter, a psychology professor at Acadia University in Nova Scotia, Canada, couldn't agree more. "A lot [of employees] clearly are feeling under-appreciated and don't believe in what the employer has them doing. "The essence of being engaged is shared values -- the employers' values are yours. A good day at work for you is furthering the employer's world. That convergence is critical," says Leiter, who pioneered the term "engagement" as the opposite of burnout in 1997, along with Christina Maslach, creator of the Maslach Burnout Inventory. "The things that promote engagement are good management, clear values and bringing people on board -- the things that organizations are supposed to be doing. ... If you pay a fair working wage, people go along. [But] more money doesn't translate to more productivity," Leiter says. Based on its survey, Towers Perrin suggests three ways companies can improve their workers' sense of engagement: * Senior management needs to demonstrate "inspiration, vision and commitment." More than half of those surveyed feel senior management treats them as if they don't matter, or are "just another part of the organization to be managed." * Employees want the opportunity to learn and grow on the job. Just 36 percent agree they have excellent career opportunities at their organization. * People want to work for a company with a reputation for excellence and a commitment to corporate social responsibility.
November 1, 2007 Copyright 2007© LRP Publications |
||||||
Print
Email
Write to the Editor
Reprints
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
© Copyright 2010 LRP Publications. All rights reserved.
|
||||