The country’s brightest female students are rejecting careers in the City as they see the Square Mile seen as unethical and rife with discrimination, a survey has shown.
Source: Recruitment and talent management: News from People Management 22 March 2010
"Employee Engagement"… is the new Buzz Word(s) of the day. A recent "Google" search reflects over 800,000 potential hits on sites offering wisdom or potential surveys on Employee Engagement especially for Gen X and Gen Y employees.
Before a reflection and sharing data on the new Present Environment, and Future Ramifications, allow me a moment to reflect on the past… Many of us in Senior Leadership positions have suggested that our employees are our greatest asset. In many organizations, it may be a case of words speaking louder than actions.
I think most Leaders would subjectively agree that employees are more likely to produce in an environment where they are generally satisfied and comfortable. But many Leaders often fall short on two major assumptions. First, we have a tendency to define "satisfied" in traditional terms of financial compensation/benefits, and second, we have a tendency to interpret employee perceptions through "our" traditional frames of reference. Maybe it is not your fault, or even to be expected as we are all products of our traditional cultures. But concepts such as "Trust" and "Feeling Valued" by employees are clearly replacing pure money as catalysts for dis-engagement and turnover. Many Leaders just don’t recognize or understand the shift in employee values because it forces us to change the way we perceive our organizational effectiveness.
But perhaps most importantly, historically it has been really difficult to quantify any correlation between workplace environment and financial return. And since we have been trained over the last 75 years to judge success based on ROI, and the efficiency of the "process," if we cannot measure the return on people engagement, it becomes a good idea, but ultimately, a low priority. Traditional Management Theory, taught most of us, "measure it, or dismiss it…" Thus training budgets are usually the first to be cut, especially training for critical soft skills, Leadership, and I am not even going to discuss senior management’s "old school" perception of training related to Culture.
All of that is changing, and changing fast. The statistical data is overwhelming. Recent research led by Gallop (Q12) and many other quality surveys, including those by ISR, are changing the priority of workplace environment, especially an environment where the employees feel as though they are "Engaged" in the Mission. I believe this can be a tremendous future advantage companies or organizations with the courage and foresight to look inside their organizations for a long term sustainable competitive advantage.
So how do we define this Buzz around Employee Engagement? ISR Global Research Director Patrick Kulesa defines Employee Engagement as: "Committed, Believe in the Values of the Company, Feel Pride in their Employer and Go the Extra Mile – and Business Results."…
In short, engaged employees feel as though they are truly valued at work. Engaged employees feel as though they directly contribute towards the Mission, and enthusiastically communicate the value of their organization. Recent data reflects the transformation from warm and fuzzy directly to the bottom line. But understanding the radically different set of values of today’s employees is a necessary catalyst for engagement success.
For those Leaders looking for support data: 2005 ISR Study (over 600,000 employees worldwide) revealed that those organizations with High Employee Engagement realized a 5.75% difference in operating margin and a 3.44% difference in net profit margin versus low engagement companies. The Gallop research reflects only 29% of the three million surveyed employees felt engaged, 55% not engaged, and 16% actively not engaged via an interview with Co-Author Curt Coffman, First Break All the Rules. Gallop estimates that this last 16% of actively not engaged employees cost the American Economy over $ 350 Million per year in lost productivity.
There are two critical potential danger signals for Leaders of today. First, of the 55% that are not engaged, they are typically not negative towards the organization in any way, almost a sleeping danger or cultural liability. And secondly, national statistics reflect a direct correlation between the length of time an employee spends with an organization and being more likely to become not engaged. For many of us, we are never as excited as we are in our first week of work. We join our organizations believing we can make a difference in the lives of our customers and co-workers. Then in some most companies, over time we feel less valued, or as though we have less of an active role in contributing to the value related principals that attracted us in the first place and then our engagement declines.
Author Leigh Branham suggests, "According to more than 80% of employees, it’s not that there’s greener grass on the other side of the fence; it’s the preponderance of negative factors in their current workplaces-from poor management practices to toxic workplace cultures-that essentially push them toward the door." Or in fact Cultures that move employees lower on the engagement scale. As many seemingly successful companies have lifetime employees, we cannot assume that they remain engaged in our "Holy Grail", Customer Service, or dedication to the Mission, either internally or externally.
In addition to investing in employee satisfaction surveys (highly recommended considering the national data) to measure employee engagement, I might suggest another test. What if we were to look at the five most significant ideas in the last year, that moved our Teams ahead of the curve in terms of "Improving the Lives of Clients or Co-Workers," (internally as well as externally)? How many of those five ideas came from within our organizations? How many of those five ideas originated from "engaged" hourly employees striving to make a difference in the Service-Centric or Mission-Driven Culture? Can you identify five?
The most effective way to engage employees is to involve each of them in the culture. Leaders need to be consistently talking and listening about Service Values and Service Missions to employees offering them an opportunity to share ways in which they contributed towards the Mission, then acknowledge and reward or recognize them. This is what author John Kotter (Leading Change) refers to by continuing to build the coalition, and celebrating short term wins.
But most critically, it is imperative for Leaders to "Walk the Walk." Actions speak far louder than words when leading by example. I am encouraging Leaders to look in the mirror when it comes to consistency in programs, incentives, and engagement as it directly contributes to the Service Mission. In my hundreds of interviews with Managers and Employees, I am often drawn to the "inconsistencies" identified by employees that have yet to be recognized by Leadership. If you ask and listen, they will share… These inconsistencies can be a significant cancer to any potential cultural shift to increased employee engagement.
The rules of Leadership are changing rapidly, not simply evolving. The powerful contribution to the bottom line and conduit for growth that is a direct result of Employee Engagement critical for all of us in the future. Engaged employees will create more loyal Customers and Employees, creating more opportunities for growth.
Many of us in Senior Leadership positions have suggested that our employees are our greatest asset. I encourage you to find new ways to engage your employees in the effort to live your "Holy Grail" and put actions way ahead of simple words.
Michael Muetzel
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Michael_Muetzel
Author of They’re Not Aloof…Just Generation X, Unlock the Mysteries to Today’s Human Capital Management
Mike Muetzel is a nationally recognized Author, Keynote Speaker and Leadership expert. His work has been featured in the national media including, The Associated Press, Bloomberg Television, Boardroom Magazine, The Manager’s Intelligence Report, The IBM Small Business Advocate, and The Boston Globe to name a few.
He is often referenced as a national expert on the unique characteristics of today’s employees. He has an extensive corporate background including nine years with Yamaha Motor Manufacturing Corporation where he sat on the Executive Committee. His prestigious clients include Fed Ex Freight, Kohler, Hilton Hotels, Motorola, Wyndham, Keebler and The Federal Aviation Administration among others. In addition, he is a former member of the faculty at Clayton State University, School of Business. University. In the words of Best Selling Author Ken Blanchard, "Mike understands what will make companies tick in the future, it’s about maximizing the potential of your people…" Visit http://www.unlockthemysteries.com
Given that most of our time is spent at work and the fact that we’re social beings, it’s inevitable that we establish social relationships which may well end up in romance.
The question to be asked is, when Cupid shoots his arrow in your direction do you need to duck and dive to prevent your employer from growling at you or can you get weak at the knees, giggle a little and embrace the relationship with your boss sitting back and giving you the thumbs up?
What exactly are the reasons for employers either embracing or pooh-poohing employees who succumb to that delightful, irresistible emotion called love?
According to an article published in “People Management” magazine (pg 18), 11 Feb 2010 entitled “A Match made in Heaven or Hell” Tim Smedley offers the following answers:
The employer has one of two choices. Firstly, to enforce policy banning relationships within the workplace solely to protect the organisation from being subject to breech of confidentiality within various departments or divisions, accusations of favouritism and a host of other complicated management and HR issues.
The second option is to take a more relaxed approach to a very natural emotion and to give people the space to be themselves while at the same time respecting the values and boundaries within the organisation.
Smedley points out that there is a place for the implementation of policies banning relationships. Examples of this would be where romantic liaisons compromise the ethical barriers between traders and analysts giving one the leverage to influence the others decision. Another example would be the enforcement of policy when employees engage in the work environment in countries and cultures which forbid relationships outside of marriage.
Generally speaking though, organisations that do enforce policy banning relationships do so because of the numerous problems caused as a result of relationships in the workplace. Such an instance may be a boss who is in relationship with a subordinate. This relationship tends to fuel accusations of favouritism and can damage the morale of other employees which leads to gossip, lack of trust etc.
A particularly difficult situation is when one partner works in HR and is exposed to various confidential complications within the workplace yet can not share any of this information with his or her partner. Preventing such complications arising in the workplace may seem like the answer to the employer hence the ban, however, human beings will be human beings and will generally take the relationship under cover which brings a whole new set of deceptive complications.
In his article, Smedley quotes employment lawyer Roger Byard, of Cripps Harries Hall, as saying: “Any employment tribunal asked to consider the lawfulness of such a policy would be highly likely to find it in breach of the right to a private life, protected by Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998”. He goes on to say that having a no-relationship policy would not provide protection against claims arising out of relationship breakdown such as issues of harassment, discrimination and unfair dismissal.
Byard advice to the employer is to steer away from prescriptive policies which suppress human nature. He suggests that employers take a mature approach to the relationship recognising that relationships will naturally form within the working environment.
Perhaps having a few balloons, some red roses and a broad smile on a love struck employees face is not so bad and may go a long way to cheering the office up.
Peter Nicholls
Does this picture fit you?
These are some of the pains you feel when the demands of work and personal life are all too much for you. They can be summed up in one word – stress.
The hidden danger is in the insidious effects of such symptoms, the outcomes of which may not surface for months or even years. But if left unattended, the wheels can eventually fall off, often in dramatic and life-diminishing ways. These include stress-related illnesses, heart conditions, relationship breakdowns, job loss and depression.
When you are not enjoying life, it often seems hard to change things around. The following seven steps may, however, make the task easier for you.
A few minutes of ‘flight’ can sustain a day of ‘fight’ if, during that time, your inner person is allowed out to enjoy the freedom of self-expression. Self-created interests can include musical appreciation by listening or playing, art, craft, beading, genealogy, bird-watching, walking for pleasure, gardening – anything that transports your thinking into your own world of enjoyment. When you lose yourself in an interest you love you find yourself – the person of worth within you.
These factors do not of themselves overcome a discordant work life mix. They do however generate a more positive attitude, in which you feel good about yourself. You are establishing a revitalized outlook on life that strengthens your self-confidence. Your problems either don’t seem so great any more, or you perceive them more calmly and with a sense of personal power in your ability to make your daily life more enjoyable.
In the final analysis these steps will enable you to become a better friend to the most important person in the world – you!
Article Source: http://www.bestmanagementarticles.com | http://performance-management.bestmanagementarticles.com | About the Author: Peter Nicholls is Australia’s People Gardener – cultivating vigorous personal growth to thrive to one’s full natural potential. Visit Peter’s website at http://www.workleisure.com or contact him at peter@workleisure.com
Some hard-working people should ask themselves why they don’t want to go home,
writes Stefan Stern on ft.com
Or are long hours essential to modern business success?
In his article, Stern considers what sort of person you have to be to succeed in the 24/7
world of global commerce that characterises the 21st century.
He argues that it is no longer enough to just be really good at your job. Drive, hunger,
ambition: today’s workplace seems to demand more and more of such stuff. And if you
are serious about getting on in your career or leading your organisation on to greater
success, a strong sense of urgency is required.
But, in our world where the celebrity is king and where reality TV has even invaded the
board room, you now have to have a real sense of identity.
As Stern puts it, you have to “front up… put on a good show… create the right
impression”. If you’re looking to move up the ladder, it is not enough to just do a really
good job, you have to be able to tell a good story about yourself too.
Using Big Brother as an example, Stern points out that never before have so many people
spent so much effort on creating an appealing self-image or a winning identity.
He quotes the distinguished sociologist Anthony Giddens and his talk at a half-day
symposium called “Humanising Work”, held under the auspices of the Lehman Brothers
centre for women in business.
“You have to work on your identity today,” Lord Giddens told the packed seminar room
at the London Business School. Lifestyles are now enormously diverse, he explained. We
have to choose who it is we are going to be.
But we all know there must be more to successful business people than the superficial
qualities that make a celebrity. Hard work, for instance.
Stern believes that TV celebrity and former chairman of leisure group Granada Sir Gerry
Robinson is being a touch disingenuous when he suggests that there are really only 10 or
12 key decisions you have to get right every year. Concentrate on them, Sir Gerry says,
and then delegate and relax.
Hard work, high levels of commitment and, even, obsession are likely to help you
succeed.
Stern refers back to Lord Giddens’ wide-ranging talk at the “Humanising Work”
symposium, where he considers the relationship between the highly committed, obsessive
professional and the more troubling phenomena of addicts and those trapped in
compulsive behaviour patterns.
New technology helps feed some people’s addiction to work. Lord Giddens jokes about
the hard-working types who, getting up in the night to go to the bathroom, seize the
chance to check their e-mails. This presupposes that the BlackBerry is not still buzzing
away on the bedside table or under the pillow… and that said executive has even gone to
bed in the first place.
But as Stern’s article points out, these compulsive characteristics are also linked to
depression. So there’s the rub. Addicts are obsessive and compulsive. The characteristics
of obsession and compulsion are associated with depression or, equally, high
achievement.
So, are obsessively long hours just part and parcel of success? Maybe. But, Stern argues,
to find out whether long hours are essential to you, the best question you can ask yourself
is just why don’t you want to go home.
Read the full article at http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c22d5128-3bb3-11dd-9cb2-
0000779fd2ac.html
