What Is Employee Engagement?

 

By Paul Bertrand

November 17, 2014

I’m confused.  I find myself reading blogs and articles on writers, experts, making me think employee engagement is defined by the performance of the worker or worse, improved engagement can be gained by a free pizza lunch.  I read recently that engagement can be added through hiring practices.  

 In an attempt to get the true definition, I first looked at the work of Erving Goffman who might of helped us have a traditional understanding of the term ‘engagement’. According to Goffman (1961) he defines engagement as “spontaneous involvement in a role” and “visible investment of attention and muscular effort”. Was this based on a sociological perspective or can it be related to an employee life. 

William Khan provided us with the first formal definition as “the harnessing of organization members selves to their work roles” (Kahn, 1990)
It was obvious through more research that the definition is still problematic.  

I turned my research to Gallup, the organization who reports to us that the bulk of workers, 63% are not engaged at work.  I would think that anyone who has dedicated so much in the last decades on the topic should be a good resource.

In an interview Jim Clifton, Chairman and CEO of Gallup, did last December with Fast Company magazine he was quoted as saying: “the idea of trying to make people happy at work is terrible,”. 

He made it clear that engagement is not as simple as making an employee happy. “What companies will inevitable find is that the only way to make a person happy is to give them a job that matches well to their strengths, a boss who cares about their development, and a mission that gives them feelings of purpose.” is what Clifton said.

So I concluded that spontaneous involvement which harnesses ourselves towards the work roles is achieved when we are doing something that is well suited to our strengths, supported and nurtured by our leaders, and has purpose to the company goals or plans. 

 

To help us get a sense of what true engagement might be, think of that first job.  Not the job you were forced in, but the one you wanted and were proud of.  Your employer hired you because of your strengths, your supervisor chose you, the ultimate sign of support, and the orientation and training clarified the purpose of how your role is critical and fits in the big picture.  Because of key elements present, the productivity and focus of the job is at its peak.  So why is engagement not sustained?

So what if I told you that I have a solution based on research to get to the cause.  Enough of the measuring of symptoms, leaders need to get to the cause.  Many companies make mistakes along the way and the employee engagement lowers.  It lowers to a point that when surveyed, these employees state they are not involved and committed to their employer.  The pizza lunch is not the answer to increasing productivity, innovation, customer service and profits.  Getting to the known areas that are a proven correlation to higher employee engagement, is what is needed.     

 Contact Canadian People Management to learn more on how you can be leading your industry, your organization, your team, to greater results. 

  Paul Bertrand is the Founder of Canadian People Management Inc. which is based out of Pickering, Ontario. His company specializes in organizational effectiveness development through solutions tailored to strengthen his client’s cultures, leadership and teams.
www.cpeoplemi.com