PA G E 1 Conrol, Opporuny & Leadershp A Sudy of Employee Engagemen n he Canadan Workplace Psychomercs Canada Ld. 1-800-661-5158 www.psychomercs.com
PA G E 2 Conens Inroducon... 3 The Research... 3 Execuve Summary... 4 Secon 1: The Engagemen Problem... 6 Secon 2: Increasng Engagemen... 11 Who s Responsble?... 12 Secon 3: Organzaonal Focus on Engagemen... 14 Secon 4: Personal Rangs of Engagemen... 16 Secon 5: Age and Engagemen... 18 Hghes Raed Influences on Engagemen... 19 Lowes Raed Influences on Engagemen... 19 Secon 6: Who Are he Dsengaged?... 20 Secon 7: Busness Secor and Engagemen... 22 Engagemen Rangs for Survey Respondens from Each Secor... 23 Organzaonal Invesmen n Engagemen... 23 Secon 8: Impac of Engagemen Tranng... 25 Secon 9: Gender and Engagemen... 27 Conclusons... 29
PA G E 3 Inroducon Employee engagemen s he connecon people feel o her work ha resuls n hgher levels of performance, commmen and loyaly. Gven hese posve resuls, here s a lo of neres n curren levels of employee engagemen, and ways n whch engagemen can be ncreased. A Psychomercs Canada, our movaon o sudy workforce engagemen was mulfaceed. We were curous o know he answers o hese quesons: Is engagemen a problem n Canadan organzaons? Wha are he resuls of engagemen? Wha happens when people are dsengaged? Who s responsble for employee engagemen? Wha can organzaons do o mprove engagemen? Wha do organzaons do ha bulds dsengagemen? The resuls of hs engagemen sudy surprsed us a mes. The ndcaon ha engaged and dsengaged employees desre he same hngs from her work was no wha we expeced. The posve mpac and value of as lle as one engagemen-focused ranng even was sarlng. Oher fndngs smply reeraed hngs we commonly alk abou. Repeaedly we hear ha ncreasng communcaon and gvng people conrol over her work bulds engagemen. We heard ha agan n hs research. For human resources (HR) professonals, he resuls of hs survey have wo man uses. Frs, hey can help HR professonals make he argumen for why ranng ha focuses on engagemen makes sense. Second, he resuls show who and wha should be argeed by he ranng. The Research In December 2010 we surveyed 368 Canadan HR professonals workng n busness, governmen, consulng, educaon and no-for-prof organzaons. As professonals wh a grea deal of famlary wh employees experences a work, hey provded a valuable perspecve on workplace engagemen.
PA G E 4 Execuve Summary Employee engagemen s bes descrbed by s resuls. Engaged employees demonsrae hgher levels of performance, commmen and loyaly. Dsengaged employees do no. Gven mos organzaons srong focus on performance, employee engagemen has become a popular opc. Our survey of Canadan HR professonals ndcaes ha, along wh s populary, engagemen s problemac and very mporan. The majory (69%) ndcaed ha engagemen s a problem n her organzaons. Eghy-wo per cen sad ha s very mporan ha her organzaons address employee engagemen. In fac, less han half of one per cen fel ha engagemen was no an mporan ssue for her organzaon. The benefs of engaged employees are found n a number of organzaonal measures. HR professonals responded ha some of he mos common resuls are a wllngness o do more han expeced (39%), hgher producvy (27%), beer workng relaonshps (13%) and more sasfed cusomers (10%). The advanage of engagemen goes beyond beer communcaon; drecly affecs he producon and effcency of an organzaon. Dsengaged employees also affec he oupu of her organzaons. Survey respondens ndcaed ha he mos common resuls of dsengagemen were dysfunconal work relaonshps (29%), lower producvy (25%) and an unwllngness o go beyond he job descrpon (17%). A sarlng fndng was ha dsengaged employees do no qu n droves or fal o show up for work. Turnover (8%) and absences (7%) were among he lower raed resuls of dsengagemen. I appears ha he dsengaged do no leave her organzaons; nsead hey say and damage boh producvy and relaonshps. To ncrease engagemen, HR professonals raed he followng as he mos effecve: conrol over how a person does her work, opporunes o use her sklls, and good relaonshps wh managemen and leadershp. Because engagemen s drven by he work envronmen and processes, can only be affeced by hose wh nfluence over hem. These people are an organzaon s leaders. The vas majory of our survey respondens (84%) ndcaed ha senor leaders and managers are prmarly responsble for employee engagemen. Far or no, appears ha s no up o employees o engage hemselves, bu up o organzaons o engage her employees.
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y PA G E 5 When asked wha leaders could do more of o mprove engagemen, respondens endorsed hese acons: Communcae clear expecaons Lsen o employees opnons Gve recognon 71% 62% 52% Drvng engagemen requres adjusng work envronmens and processes. Ths s he realm and responsbly of leadershp, and s leaders who bear he nal burden. From nally machng a person s sklls o he job requremens, o communcang clear expecaons and recognzng a job well done, leadershp begns and susans employee engagemen. There are also sgnfcan benefs o be ganed from ranng ha focuses on engagemen. In organzaons ha provde engagemen ranng, he percenage of engaged employees rses by more han 10%, and he proporon ha see engagemen as a problem drops by 20%.
PA G E 6 Secon 1: The Engagemen Problem I am a he pon n my career where I am red of ryng o push ahead and have become complacen and f wasn for he penson I would be lookng for oher work. If you ype employee engagemen no Google you wll receve more han 2 mllon resuls. In 2010, here were more han 3,000 news arcles abou engagemen. Gven he vas amoun ha has been wren, one could assume ha employee engagemen or he lack hereof s a errble problem. One of he prmary goals of hs sudy was o es he hypohess ha a lack of engagemen s real, and has real consequences. HR professonals are n a poson n organzaons ha provdes hem wh a good vew no he acvy of employees. Ths vew gves hem nsgh no wheher or no engagemen s a problem, and how mporan s for organzaons o address. Yes, always Yes, frequenly Yes, occasonaly Is employee engagemen a problem n your organzaon? Yes 69% No 31% Almos seven ou of 10 professonals ndcaed ha engagemen s a problem n her organzaons. Gven he dverse work secors of he survey respondens, hs s a srkng number. I overwhelmngly ndcaes ha engagemen, and he lack hereof, s seen as a sgnfcan concern.
S E C T I O N 1 : T H E E N G A G E M E N T P R O B L E M PA G E 7 There are some dfferences beween work envronmens. Those workng n governmen and busness secors were mos lkely o denfy engagemen as a problem; people n educaon and no-for-prof organzaons saw as less so. Our survey was no able o denfy why hese dfferences exs beween dfferen work secors, bu does ndcae ha hose workng n governmen and busness have a greaer problem on her hands. I may be ha larger organzaons have envronmens ha are no as conducve o engagemen, or ha no-for-profs provde some unque benefs ha boos engagemen. Tha s no o say, however, ha hose n he consulng, educaon and no-for-prof secors have a free rde. The majory of people n all organzaons denfy engagemen as a problemac ssue. Percenage of Respondens From Each Busness Secor Who Idenfed Engagemen as a Problem Governmen Busness Consulng Educaon No for Prof 80.3% 74.4% 66.3% 64.2% 54.2% Yes, always Yes, frequenly Yes, occasonal No, neve fs How mporan s for organzaons o address employee engagemen? Very Imporan 82.3% Imporan 13.8% Somewha Imporan 2.9% No Imporan 0.5% 0 20 40 60 80 100
E N G A G E M E N T S T U D Y S E C T I O N 1 : T H E E N G A G E M E N T P R O B L E M PA G E 8 A large number of professonals see engagemen as a problem a problem ha s very mporan for organzaons o address. More han 96% of respondens raed addressng employee engagemen as mporan or very mporan. Less han half of one per cen saw engagemen as an ssue of no mporance. These resuls leave no doub ha HR professonals vew employee engagemen as a key ssue. Managemen gves lp servce and says lsens, bu does no. Do as you are old s busness as usual whch conrbues o hgher levels of urnoverand overall job dssasfacon. Yes, always In he survey, parcpans were asked, Consderng he people you work wh on a daly bass, wha percenage would you say are engaged? Dsrbuon of worker engagemen % of Respondens 21.3% 22.3% 13.1% 13.6% 10.9% 6.5% 6.5% 3% 0.8% 1.9% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 5 10 15 20 25 The char above shows he percenage of employee engagemen chosen by respondens. For example, 1.9% of he respondens ndcaed ha 20% of people hey nerac wh are engaged, whle 22.3% of he respondens sad ha 80% of he people hey work wh are engaged. Mos survey respondens ndcaed ha he majory of people hey work wh are engaged. A weghed average (calculaed by dvdng he sum of all he rangs by he oal number of responses) places he average rae of engaged employees a 65%. I also ndcaes ha a sgnfcan poron of he workng populaon s no engaged. Those answerng he survey ndcaed ha hs dsengaged group s 35% of he workforce, almos four ou of 10 people.
S E C T I O N 1 : T H E E N G A G E M E N T P R O B L E M PA G E 9 I really enjoy my job. I have auonomy, receve challengng projecs, have a grea eam and good workng relaonshps wh ohers n he organzaon. These resuls show ha many HR professonals see engagemen as a problem. They also ndcae ha engagemen s very mporan o address. Fnally, HR professonals also denfy sgnfcan levels of dsengagemen n he people wh whom hey work. To clarfy he mporance of workforce engagemen, we waned o denfy he benefs ha arse from engaged employees. The mos common oucomes are a wllngness of engaged employees o do more han expeced, and hgher producvy. Wh producvy beng a key ndcaor of work performance, survey respondens ndcaed ha engagemen has a profound Yes, always mpac on organzaonal performance. Wha s he mos common resul on engaged employees? Wllngness o do more han expeced 38.8% Hgher producvy 26.6% Beer workng relaonshps 12.7% More sasfed cusomers 9.5% Greaer loyaly o he organzaon 7.6% Improved communcaon 2.1% Less urnover 1.3% Fewer absences 1% 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
S E C T I O N 1 : T H E E N G A G E M E N T P R O B L E M PA G E 1 0 I could go on bu why boher, I m ou of here n 8 monhs and alhough I lke my job and he people I work wh I am dsllusoned wh he corporaon. The hghes raed resul of dsengaged employees was dysfunconal work relaonshps, wh 29% of professonals denfyng hs as he mos common resul of dsengagemen. Ths was closely followed by lower producvy (25%) and an unwllngness o go beyond her job descrpon (17%). Seveny-one per cen of he effecs of dsengaged employees are covered by hese hree resuls: poor relaonshps, poor producvy, and poor audes. Turnover and absences followed n a dsan fourh and ffh poson. Wha s sarlng s ha dsengaged employees generally show up for work and sck wh he job. The srkng problem s ha whle on he job hey are less producve, poson relaonshps and have lle neres n workng beyond her specfed responsbles. The challenge for organzaons s ha dsengaged employees do no have hgher urnover raes or absences; nsead, hey say wh he organzaon and dsrup he work envronmen. Lke a roen apple n a barrel, he dsengaged Yes, always spol he good hngs around hem. Wha s he mos common resul of dsengaged employees? Dysfunconal work relaonshps 29% Lower producvy 25% Unwllngness o go beyond job descrpon 17.3% Hgher urnover 7.8% More absences 6.7% Frusraed cusomers 6.2% Poor communcaon 4% Dsloyaly 3.5% 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
PA G E 1 1 Secon 2: Increasng Engagemen Engagemen happens when saff feel n conrol of her suaon and can make decsons abou he way n whch work s compleed. Lead wh negry. Cheer for your employees. Expec a lo from hem. Hre he rgh person no he rgh poson. Pay close aenon o human dynamcs n he workplace. Guard agans negavy. Wh engagemen seen as a sgnfcan problem, we waned o know wha ype of acves bes ncrease employee engagemen. We asked HR professonals o rae he effecveness of 10 work-relaed ssues a helpng engage people. The op raed were havng a work envronmen ha bulds posve relaonshps and ensurng a good f beween a person s sklls and hs or her job requremens. Havng a good work amosphere where people are able o do wha hey do bes was ranked as very effecve n erms of ncreasng engagemen. The lowes raed areas were salary and benefs, and bonuses and fnancal awards. These were raed as somewha effecve o effecve a ncreasng engagemen. I s mporan o noe ha, alhough hese are he lowes raed, HR professonals do see hese drec fnancal ncenves playng a role. Wha s neresng s ha hey are no seen as he mos effecve. Salary and fnancal rewards can be pu n place o ncrease engagemen, bu hey are ceranly no he only requremen for an engaged workforce. Insead, work relaonshps, opporunes o use sklls and learn new ones, feedback and communcaon play a sronger role n ncreasng engagemen. Yes, always Posve work relaonshps How effecve are he followng a ncreasng employee engagemen? Good f beween person s sklls and job requremens Regular feedback on employee performance Opporunes o learn new sklls Gvng employees greaer conrol over her work Celebrang progress 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.6 3.5 1 = No Effecve 2 = Somewha Effecve 3 = Effecve 4 = Very Effecve Communcang he drecon/sraegy of he organzaon 4% 3.2 Access o a role model/menor 3 Bonuses and fnancal awards Salary and benefs 2.5 2.5 0 1 2 3 4 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
S E C T I O N 2 : I N C R E A S I N G E N G A G E M E N T PA G E 1 2 Who s Resposble? When asked who shares he mos responsbly for engagemen, half of he HR professonals seleced managemen, and a hrd denfed senor leadershp. Only a mnory of 15.9% ndcaed ha employees are prmarly responsble for her own engagemen. Far or no, he grea majory of respondens ndcaed ha engagng employees s he responsbly of hose who can nfluence he organzaon s work envronmen and processes. I s a queson of organzaons engagng employees, no employees engagng hemselves. Work wh mddle managemen. They have he daly neracons wh he greaes number of employees. They need o be chosen very wsely. I have a new manager ha s over bearng and never wrong. I have gone from very engaged o somewha because of her aude. Who s prmarly responsble for engagemen? Employees 15.9% Senor Leaders 34.1% Managers 50% Yes, always Yes, frequenly Yes, occasonaly
S E C T I O N 2 : I N C R E A S I N G E N G A G E M E N T PA G E 1 3 Communcae o people abou he changes ha are happenng and lsen o her perspecves and opnons abou negrang he changes. Gven hs denfed responsbly, here are hngs ha leaders can do more of o mprove employee engagemen. The wo hghes raed recommendaons for leaders were o lsen o her employees opnons (70.4%), and communcae clear expecaons (67.6%). Much furher down he ls were helpng fnd soluons (38.9%) and defendng her drec repors (15.0%). I does no seem surprsng ha ncreasng engagemen wll requre leaders o lsen o her employees deas and clearly communcae wha s expeced of hem. Ye he vas majory of respondens ndcaed ha hese are hngs leaders need o do more of. Ths nformaon conans boh good and bad news. The good news s ha beer communcaon s no parcularly cosly, ye goes a long way n engagng employees. The bad news s ha hs s somehng we have known for a long me, ye leaders sll sruggle wh. These recommendaons for leaders hold rue across all work secors. In busness, governmen, consulng, educaon and no-for-prof organzaons, respondens raed communcang clear expecaons and lsenng o employees opnons as he op hngs leaders can do o mprove engagemen. Yes, always Yes, frequenly Yes, occasonaly No, never fsdf Wha could leaders do more of o mprove employee engagemen? I s unforunae ha mos senor leaders and managers don ge he connecon beween ncreased employee engagemen and ncreased producvy. They are oo focused on he boom lne and geng work done ha hey don nves n employee engagemen on a regular bass. Lsen o employees opnons Communcae clear expecaons Gve recognon and prase Provde learnng and developmen opporunes Help fnd soluons o problems 38.9% Defend drec repors 15.0% 58.0% 56.4% 70.4% 67.6% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
PA G E 1 4 Secon 3: Organzaonal Focus on Engagemen Wh he coss of dsengagemen, and he frequen recognon abou he benefs of engaged employees, we waned o know how organzaons focused on he opc and worked o make mprovemens. Survey respondens ndcaed ha he majory of organzaons (55.8%) do no measure engagemen. However, a sgnfcanly mnory (44.2%) do assess he engagemen level of her employees. Wha s no measured canno be ncreased! And you canno manage and mprove wha s no measured. So Measurng Engagemen and Takng Acon s key! Yes, always Yes, frequenly Yes, occasonaly Does your organzaon measure employee engagemen? Yes 44.2% No 55.8%
S E C T I O N 3 : O R G A N I Z AT I O N A L F O C U S O N E N G A G E M E N T PA G E 1 5 In a smlar breakdown, he percenage of organzaons ha drecly address employee engagemen s also n he md-40% range. These fndngs ndcae ha 60% of organzaons do no focus on engagemen drecly, bu hey may mplemen oher changes and ranng ha affec engagemen. Yes, always Yes, frequenly Yes, occasonal Does your organzaon address employee engagemen drecly? We ddn hnk abou unl one of our eam faled o follow hrough n a bg way over several monhs, and refused o ake responsbly for. Whle hs employee was no performng and he admnsraon was no acng, he job wen from wonderful o sressful. Yes 41% No 59% Yes, always Yes, frequenly Yes, occasonal How ofen does ranng on how o engage employees ake place n your organzaon? Never 28.2% Rarely 42.5% (Once a year) Somemes 24.4% (2 o 4 mes a year) Ofen 4.9% (More han 5 mes a year) The amoun of ranng akng place n organzaons s que vared. Tweny-egh per cen of organzaons conduc no ranng on how o mprove engagemen, and 42.5% provde ranng once a year a he mos. Gven he overwhelmng response ha engagemen s a problem, s somewha surprsng ha less han 30% of organzaons provde engagemen ranng more han once a year.
PA G E 1 6 Secon 4: Personal Rangs of Engagemen As par of our research we were neresed n he engagemen level of survey respondens. We also waned o know wha HR professonals raed as havng he greaes mpac on her work engagemen. How would you rank your level of work engagemen? Yes, always Yes, frequenly Yes, occasonal My engagemen s slppng quckly due o beng under-ulzed, and wh no scope o enhance he work I am delverng. Very Engaged 57.5% Somewha Engaged 37.3% No Engaged 4.7% Acvely Dsengaged 1.1% The vas majory of respondens ndcaed ha hey were somewha or very engaged n her work. Only slghly more han 5% of people noed ha hey were no engaged or were acvely dsengaged. How sasfed are you wh your curren role? Yes, always Yes, frequenly Yes, occasonal Very Sasfed 44% Sasfed 43% Dssasfed 12% Very Dssasfed 1% No surprsngly, he majory of respondens raed hemselves as sasfed or very sasfed wh her curren role. Numerous sudes have shown a srong correlaon beween work engagemen and work sasfacon.
S E C T I O N 4 : P E R S O N A L R AT I N G S O F E N G A G E M E N T PA G E 1 7 Alhough I am new o my organzaon (7 monhs), I have already been able o conrbue my experse and sklls beyond my job descrpon. In wha s a very engaged and sasfed group of respondens, s neresng o know wha nfluences her engagemen he mos. Hghes ranked was conrol over how o do her work and opporunes o use her sklls. Ths was closely followed by good relaonshps wh managemen and leaders of he organzaon as well as menally smulang work. The hngs raed lowes n erms of her nfluence on engagemen were salary and benefs, and he poenal for career advancemen. For survey respondens, fnancal rewards and advancemen are no as engagng. Yes, always Conrol over how you do your work Opporunes o use your sklls Rae he nfluence he followng have on your work engagemen. Good relaonshps wh managemen/leadershp Menally smulang work Good relaonshps wh co-workers 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.5 1 = No Influenal 2 = Somewha Influenal 3 = Influenal 4 = Very Influenal Opporunes o develop new sklls 3.3 Poenal for career advancemen 2.8 Salary & benefs 2.4 0 1 2 3 4 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
PA G E 1 8 Secon 5: Age and Engagemen A key par of he sudy was o examne wheher here were age dfferences n level of engagemen and work sasfacon. Alhough here was some varaon n engagemen levels, respondens n each of he dfferen age groups were que smlar. The vas majory descrbed hemselves as engaged, and only a small proporon sad hey were no engaged or were acvely dsengaged. Supervsor doesn lsen o my suggesons or appears nmdaed by good deas from ohers. As a resul, I don even boher gvng my suggesons anymore because hey don ge consdered. Age Group Somewha o Very Engaged No Engaged 18 29 93.3% 6.7% 30 39 91.7% 8.3% 40 49 92.7% 7.3% 50 59 96.4% 3.6% 60+ 94.1% 5.9% Sasfacon levels showed a greaer varaon beween age groups, wh hose aged 30 o 39 reporng he hghes levels of sasfacon wh her curren roles. People whose age fell beween 40 and 49 years repored he hghes levels of dssasfacon wh her curren acves. In fac, people aged 40 o 49 were hree mes as lkely o be dssasfed as hose aged 30 o 39. If we were o gnore he group of people n he 18- o 29-year-old range because of her small number, appears ha dssasfacon peaks a age 40 o 49 and hen decreases. Ths s no a longudnal sudy, so we canno know wheher hose currenly aged 40 o 49 wll fnd her work sasfacon ncreasng as hey ge older. However, hs age group does repor hgher levels of dssasfacon han any oher. Ths could be due o generaonal dfferences or he ypcal work suaon of hose n hs age range. Age Group Sasfed o Very Sasfed Dssasfed 18 29 86.7% 13.3% 30 39 93.8% 6.2% 40 49 82.0% 18.0% 50 59 85.5% 14.5% 60+ 90.4% 9.6%
S E C T I O N 5 : A G E A N D E N G A G E M E N T PA G E 1 9 We also examned wheher age had any mpac on wha people raed as mos nfluenal o her work engagemen. Resuls from each age group were que smlar, wh he larges dfferences comng from hose aged 18 o 29. For hs group, he opporuny o develop new sklls was very nfluenal, as were relaonshps wh boh co-workers and managemen. Ths s no surprsng, gven ha people sarng n her careers would fnd he opporunes o learn and develop more rewardng han hose furher down her career pahs. Hghes Raed Influences on Engagemen I ge dsengaged when my manager oms nformaon, leaves me n he dark, s wrong and doesn adm or re-does work raher han gvng me feedback. Age Group 18 29 30 39 40 49 50 59 60+ Relaonshps wh co-workers Relaonshps wh managemen Opporunes o use sklls Opporunes o develop new sklls Conrol over work Conrol over work Conrol over work Opporunes o use sklls Relaonshps wh managemen Smulang work Opporunes o use sklls Opporunes o use sklls Relaonshps wh co-workers Smulang work Opporunes o use sklls Smulang work Relaonshps wh managemen Conrol over work Smulang work Relaonshps wh managemen The lowes raed nfluence on engagemen for all age groups was salary and benefs. Ths does no mean ha hese fnancal ncenves are no nfluenal, bu smply ha people from each age group denfed hem as he leas nfluenal of he hngs lsed. Whereas he areas lsed n he able above were all raed as nfluenal o very nfluenal, salary and benefs were ranked by each age group as only somewha nfluenal. The second area, career advancemen, was also gven he same rank by everyone excep hose n he younges age group. Career advancemen had less nfluence on engagemen for older workers, whereas conrol over work was raed as less nfluenal by younger employees. Ths may smply reflec recognon of her curren work saus; when begnnng a career, expecng o have conrol over much of your work s unrealsc. People n he older age groups lsed conrol over her work as one of he mos nfluenal hngs for her engagemen. Lowes Raed Influences on Engagemen Age Group 18 29 30 39 40 49 50 59 60+ Salary & benefs Salary & benefs Salary & benefs Salary & benefs Salary & benefs Conrol over work Career advancemen Career advancemen Career advancemen Career advancemen So wha can be made of he lower rang of salary and benefs? They undoubedly play a role n keepng employees engaged. However, here are hngs beyond fnancal rewards ha organzaons can focus on o mprove engagemen. Posve relaonshps wh managemen, and gvng people greaer conrol over her work, are boh hghly raed and do no come wh he same coss as ncreasng salares. Indeed, sudy afer sudy has shown ha people rae mcromanagng as one of he hngs hey dslke mos.
PA G E 2 0 The dsengaged people around me are he ones who ve been personally hur, dscplned, overlooked for awards, or unapprecaed. Engagemen seems o be largely a funcon of feelng n conrol and feelng apprecaed. Secon 6: Who Are he Dsengaged? A poron of our respondens raed hemselves as no engaged or acvely dsengaged. These people dd no see hemselves as proacve parcpans n her organzaons. We waned o know wha nervenons would bes nfluence her engagemen, and wha hey would look for from her organzaon s leaders. Yes, always Rae he nfluence he followng have on your work engagemen. Conrol over how you do your work Opporunes o use your sklls Good relaonshps wh managemen/leadershp Menally smulang work Good relaonshps wh co-workers 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.52 3.43 1 = No Influenal 2 = Somewha Influenal 3 = Influenal 4 = Very Influenal Opporunes o develop new sklls Poenal for career advancemen 3.43 3.33 Salary & benefs 2.19 0 1 2 3 4 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 The hree hghes raed nfluences for he dsengaged were conrol over her work, opporunes o use her sklls, and posve relaonshps wh he managemen and leadershp of her organzaon. In essence, hs provdes he road map for re-engagng employees who have pulled back from he organzaon. Gvng employees greaer freedom over how hey conduc her work and allowng hem o use he sklls hey have developed are seen as very nfluenal n buldng engagemen. Managers and leaders also need o foser good relaonshps whn he organzaon, as hs oo plays a sgnfcan role n buldng engagemen and reapng s benefs.
S E C T I O N 6 : W H O A R E T H E D I S E N G A G E D? PA G E 2 1 Srong, clear and ruhful communcaon from senor managemen. Don jus ell employees wha you hnk we wan o hear. Tell hem he ruh. Thngs are ough. Decsons are ough. Money s gh. Trus hem o sand ogeher o help. Make beer hres and ensure ha here s a grea deal of f beween he employee and he job. The key fndng from hs analyss s ha dsengaged and engaged people raed he same hngs as nfluenal. The dsengaged are no lookng for anyhng above and beyond wha engaged people look for. Ths means ha engagng hose employees who have fallen by he waysde does no requre any dfferen ypes of nervenons. Insead, organzaons can focus on he same ypes of acves and posvely nfluence boh dsengaged and engaged employees. Yes, always Yes, frequenly Yes, occasonaly No, never fsdf Wha could leaders do more of o mprove employee engagemen? Communcae clear expecaons Lsen o employees opnons Gve recognon and prase Provde learnng and developmen opporunes 42.9% Help fnd soluons o problems Defend drec repors 15% 28.6% 42.9% 52.4% 61.9% 71.4% I beleve ha people wan o work and wan o do good work. Leaders who undersand hs and creae an envronmen ha allows people o do her bes work wll have he mos engaged employees. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 So wha are hese hngs ha leaders can do? By far he wo bgges hngs for he dsengaged are clear communcaon and lsenng. These jus so happen o be wha engaged people rae as he hghes as well. Dsengaged employees are no dfferen n her needs or desres from hose who are engaged a work. The dsengaged do no requre a dfferen ype of movaon, or a dfferen relaonshp wh he organzaon s leadershp. Insead, hey wan he same four hngs ha engaged people say hey wan: 1. Conrol over her work 2. Opporuny o use her sklls 3. Clear expecaons 4. Opporuny o share her deas and opnons
PA G E 2 2 Allow he saff o have full regn whn a srucure. Gve hem he opporuny o make he decsons, wheher correc or no, and walk wh hem hrough he process of learnng. Secon 7: Busness Secor and Engagemen Respondens o our survey work n fve secors: busness, governmen, consulng, educaon, and no for prof. Gven he dverse work acves, values and goals of hese dfferen secors, we were neresed o see wheher any aspecs of engagemen dffered beween hem. These aspecs ncluded he engagemen level of people, he hngs ha bes nfluence engagemen, Yes, always Yes, frequenly Yes, occasonaly No, never fsdf he levels of nvesmen, and he requremens of leaders n each secor. Wha percenage of people ha you work wh are engaged? No for Prof 71.5% Educaon 67.1% Consulng 66.1% d Busness Governmen 63.4% 61.3% *The percenage s a weghed average calculaed by dvdng he sum of all weghed rangs by he number of oal responses. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 The proporon of engaged people was relavely smlar across work secors. Ye people workng n no-for-prof organzaons sad he hghes majory of her colleagues were engaged (72%), whereas hose n governmen repored he lowes rae of engagemen among her colleagues (61%). A 10% dfference may no seem ha large; however, consderng he number of people n he workforce, he proporon of employees who are dsengaged s sarlng. When asked abou he effecveness of dfferen ways o ncrease engagemen, professonals across all work secors ranked posve work relaonshps he hghes, and bonuses and fnancal awards he lowes. When asked wha had he sronges mpac on her own engagemen, respondens from every secor excep consulng lsed havng conrol over how hey do her work (Consulng-secor employees raed opporunes o use her sklls as he hghes). Of he choces n he survey, respondens from all secors ndcaed ha salary and benefs had he leas nfluence.
S E C T I O N 7 : B U S I N E S S S E C T O R A N D E N G A G E M E N T PA G E 2 3 Engagemen Rangs for Survey Respondens From Each Secor Work Secor People Who Are Somewha o Very Engaged Busness 91.5% Governmen 93.0% Consulng 97.4% Educaon 93.8% No for Prof 95.7% Organzaonal Invesmen n Engagemen Along wh dfferences n employee engagemen across work envronmens come vared amouns of nvesmen n work engagemen. Busness and governmen organzaons are he mos acve n measurng employee engagemen. More han half of busness and governmen employee respondens ndcaed ha her organzaons evaluae he engagemen levels of employees, whereas only a hrd of hose workng n educaon or no-for-prof organzaons could say he same. Yes, always Yes, frequenly Yes, occasonaly No, never fsdf Percenage of organzaons ha measure employee engagemen Organzaonal Invesmen n Engagemen Busness 58.4% d Governmen 50.7% Consulng 44.1% No for Prof Educaon 33.3% 31.1% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
S E C T I O N 7 : B U S I N E S S S E C T O R A N D E N G A G E M E N T PA G E 2 4 I have been responsble for runnng our Engagemen Surveys for he pas few years and I m asounded a wha s learned versus wha s dscussed openly wh our employees. Employees aren supd, hey know ha when hey never hear back abou her feedback or acons o be aken, ha he company doesn really care abou hem. Of course, measurng he engagemen of employees does no mean much f nohng s done wh ha nformaon. We waned o know wha percenage of organzaons no only measured engagemen, bu also acvely dreced effors o mprove. When comes o addressng engagemen, busness organzaons are he mos acve. Ffy-fve per cen of busness respondens ndcaed ha her organzaon focuses drecly on mprovng worker engagemen. The numbers fall o he 44% o 45% level for consulng and governmen organzaons, o 34% for no-for-prof groups, and o 23% for educaonal nsuons. Yes, always Yes, frequenly Yes, occasonaly No, never fsdf Percenage of or organzaons ha ha address employee engagemen employee engagemen drecly drecly Busness 55.1% Consulng 45% Governmen 43.9% No for Prof 34% Educaon 23% d 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 A recurrng heme was ha busness and governmen groups end o nves more resources no measurng engagemen and focusng on drecly. However, he engagemen levels of her employees are acually raed as slghly worse han hose of people workng n consulng, educaon and no-for-prof organzaons. Ths brngs up a number of quesons: Why do busness and governmen spend more me and effor on workforce engagemen and ye have lower levels of engagemen? Would her resuls be worse f hey removed all engagemen nervenons? Do her engagemen effors acually have lle mpac on employees connecon o her work?
PA G E 2 5 asd dasd If you say ha you value and wan o hear employee suggesons and deas, hen gve employees feedback on fnal decsons. They need o know wha was consdered and why somehng s feasble or no. Secon 8: Impac of Engagemen Tranng Engagemen s defnely seen by he vas majory of our survey respondens as a problem ha needs o be addressed. Many organzaons have nvesed me and resources no measurng engagemen, conducng engagemen nervenons and ranng her saff on how o engage ohers. The key queson s, does hs nvesmen make any dfference? To shed some lgh on hs ssue, we spl our responden group no four caegores based on he amoun of engagemen ranng provded by her organzaons. We hen looked a her levels of engagemen and sasfacon. Percenage of respondens who sad engagemen s a problem n organzaons ha never have ranng: 74% have ranng once a year: 75% have ranng wo o four mes a year: 55% have ranng more han fve mes a year: 61% In organzaons ha provde ranng wo o four mes a year, he percenage of people who see engagemen as a problem drops by 20%. Percenage of engaged employees n organzaons ha never have ranng: 60% have ranng once a year: 65% have ranng wo o four mes a year: 71% have ranng more han fve mes a year: 69% In organzaons ha provde more frequen engagemen ranng, he percenage of engaged employees rses by more han 10%. Percenage of respondens who raed hemselves as very engaged n organzaons ha never have ranng: 48% have ranng once a year: 60% have ranng wo o four mes a year: 61% have ranng more han fve mes a year: 61% In organzaons ha have some engagemen ranng durng he year, 12% more people descrbe hemselves as very engaged han he percenage n organzaons ha never have engagemen-focused ranng.
S E C T I O N 8 : I M PA C T O F E N G A G E M E N T T R A I N I N G PA G E 2 6 Percenage of respondens who raed hemselves as very sasfed n organzaons ha never have ranng: 32% have ranng once a year: 45% have ranng wo o four mes a year: 49% have ranng more han fve mes a year: 56% Dfferences n sasfacon rangs are even more dramac. As he amoun of ranng opporunes ncreases n an organzaon, he repored levels of employees who are very sasfed seadly ncreases. Even wh only one engagemen ranng nervenon a year, he percenage of people who rae hemselves as very sasfed ncreases from 32% o 45%. Tranng focused on how o engage employees n organzaons has a posve effec. Levels of workforce engagemen and sasfacon are reporedly hgher n hose organzaons ha provde ranng. The proporon of people who are very engaged n her work ncreases dramacally, and he amoun of engagemen problems decreases by a sgnfcan amoun.
PA G E 2 7 dasd dasd Secon 9: Gender and Engagemen The neracon beween gender and engagemen s somehng ha we also waned o examne. We waned o see wheher here were dfferences n engagemen and sasfacon levels, and also wheher recommendaons for how o ncrease engagemen vared by gender. Somemes, he employee who voced he dea s no gven cred nor are hey nved o parcpae on mplemenng her suggeson, and hey are no provded wh feedback on he feasbly/melnes of suggesons. fsdf No, never Yes, occasonaly Yes, frequenly Yes, always How would you rank your level of work engagemen? 58.5% 55.8% 37.2% 36.8% 5.2% 3.2% 0% 1.5% Very Engaged Somewha Engaged No Engaged Acvely Dsengaged 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Males Females In erms of engagemen rankngs, male and female respondens o he survey were remarkably smlar. As shown n he fgure above, males and females had a nearly dencal dsrbuon of her rang of engagemen.
S E C T I O N 9 : G E N D E R A N D E N G A G E M E N T PA G E 2 8 dasd dasd fsdf No, never Yes, occasonaly Yes, frequenly Yes, always How sasfed are you wh your curren role? 44.7% 45% 41.6% 39.4% 16% 11.2% 0% 1.9% Very Sasfed Sasfed Dssasfed Very Dssasfed 0 10 20 30 40 50 Males Females Levels of sasfacon were also que smlar beween gender groups. In fac, when lookng a hose who repored beng very sasfed or sasfed, he dfference beween males a 84.1% and females a 86.6% s neglgble. When comes o hngs ha leaders can do o mprove engagemen, he op wo for boh genders were lsenng o employees opnons and communcang clear expecaons. Females dd place a somewha hgher value han males on provdng recognon and prase. However, when rankng leadershp engagemen acves, males and females denfed he same key varables as mporan and no mporan. For all respondens, communcaon and lsenng were raed as mporan, whereas helpng fnd soluons and defendng drec repors were consdered much less mporan. Fnally, when comes o wha mos nfluences people s engagemen, boh males and females raed havng conrol over how hey do her work, and opporunes o use her sklls, as he mos nfluenal. In erms of wha has he leas nfluence, members of each gender denfed career advancemen and salary and benefs.
PA G E 2 9 Conclusons Employee engagemen s problemac. The resuls from he survey show hs beyond any doub. When employees are engaged, hey demonsrae hgher levels of performance and commmen, and mproved work relaonshps. When hey are dsengaged, producvy suffers and relaonshps beween employees can become dysfunconal. Wheher engaged or dsengaged, employees generally say wh her organzaons, havng eher a posve or negave mpac. Increasng engagemen s a mulfaceed challenge, bu here are a number of common hemes. One, provde people wh greaer conrol over how hey do her work. Two, gve employees opporunes o use her sklls. Three, buld beer communcaon and relaonshps beween managemen and saff. These hemes reman consan; hey are denfed by engaged and dsengaged employees, males and females, and all generaons. Drvng engagemen requres adjusng our work envronmens and processes. Ths s he realm and responsbly of leadershp, and s leaders who bear he nal burden. More han egh ou of 10 respondens ndcae ha senor leaders and managers are he ones o ncrease engagemen. From nally machng a person s sklls o he job requremens, o communcang clear expecaons, o recognzng a job well done, leadershp begns and susans employee engagemen. Ye here s also reason for hope n hese resuls. Wh ncreased communcaon, less mcromanagng, and greaer responsbles for employees, employee engagemen makes leaps forward. Organzaons wh ranng on how o ncrease engagemen show much mprovemen compared wh hose wh no ranng, even when ha ranng s nfrequen. I does no have o ake much o ge sared and realze some benefs of ncreased engagemen. Top Tps for Drvng Engagemen 1. Buld posve work relaonshps. 2. Ensure a good f beween people s sklls and her job requremens. 3. Provde regular feedback on performance. 4. Gve opporunes o learn new sklls. 5. Gve employees greaer conrol over her work: sop mcromanagng. 6. Celebrae progress and recognze employees accomplshmens. 7. Share nformaon: communcae he drecon and sraegy of he organzaon. 8. Gve employees he opporuny o share her deas.
PA G E 3 0 Psychomercs Canada Psychomercs Canada has been provdng assessmen ools and consulng servces for he developmen and selecon of people n busness, governmen and educaon for over 30 years. Our experse s n applyng busness psychology n he areas of personal and leadershp developmen, eam buldng, conflc resoluon, employee selecon and sklls and performance assessmen. Our clen ls of more han 5000 organzaons ncludes 84 of he op 100 companes n Canada. These clens use our assessmen producs and servces o denfy he srenghs and poenal of people - beer enablng hese ndvduals o work ogeher, complee projecs, plan her careers and lead ohers. For more nformaon on hs sudy conac Shawn Bakker: 1-800-661-5158 ex. 238 or sbakker@psychomercs.com Psychomercs Canada Ld. 1-800-661-5158 www.psychomercs.com 2011 Psychomercs Canada Ld. MBTI and Myers-Brggs Type Indcaor are rademarks or regsered rademarks of he MBTI Trus, Inc., n he Uned Saes and oher counres. The MBTI Cerfcaon Program s offcally recognzed by CPP as a qualfyng program o admnser and nerpre he MBTI nsrumen. Srong Ineres Invenory, FIRO-B, CPI 260, CPI 434 are regsered rademarks of CPP, Inc.