Search This Blog
Order the Book
Read this best selling guide to implementing strategic recognition as a sound management method that moves employee recognition from anecdotal morale-booster to data-driven business discipline. Click here to learn more.
Categories
- cash vs non-cash rewards (52)
- Comments on Articles and Research (443)
- company values and recognition (132)
- culture management (102)
- culture of appreciation (205)
- Customer Stories (28)
- employee engagement (194)
- employee retention (78)
- global recognition (66)
- Globoforce News (89)
- Globoforce podcasts (4)
- Globoforce Recognition Book (17)
- high performance culture (69)
- importance of executive buy-in (63)
- measuring recognition and engagement (57)
- mergers and acquisitions (6)
- motivating employees (175)
- operational excellence (65)
- performance management (90)
- recognition for all (108)
- recognition in an ailing economy (145)
- reward choice (56)
- strategic recognition (379)
- webinar recaps (33)
Blog Archive
-
►
2008
(143)
- February 2008 (1)
- March 2008 (15)
- April 2008 (13)
- May 2008 (13)
- June 2008 (12)
- July 2008 (15)
- August 2008 (16)
- September 2008 (14)
- October 2008 (15)
- November 2008 (12)
- December 2008 (17)
-
►
2009
(179)
- January 2009 (14)
- February 2009 (13)
- March 2009 (18)
- April 2009 (19)
- May 2009 (16)
- June 2009 (18)
- July 2009 (14)
- August 2009 (15)
- September 2009 (13)
- October 2009 (14)
- November 2009 (13)
- December 2009 (12)
-
▼
2010
(186)
- January 2010 (14)
- February 2010 (16)
- March 2010 (14)
- April 2010 (14)
- May 2010 (14)
- June 2010 (17)
- July 2010 (16)
- August 2010 (13)
- September 2010 (16)
- October 2010 (16)
- November 2010 (14)
- December 2010 (22)
-
►
2011
(86)
- January 2011 (21)
- February 2011 (20)
- March 2011 (23)
- April 2011 (21)
- May 2011 (1)
Popular Posts
-
Continuing our look at recent industry research Aberdeen Group just issued “Beyond Satisfaction: Engaging Employees to Retain Customers.” A...
-
Recognize This: If employee engagement isn’t a board-level concern, it’s not really an important initiative. Many say the follow-through ...
-
Globoforce released today the results of our research study of the importance of bridging the gap between the Finance and Human Resource fu...
-
A recent issue of Incentive magazine offered interesting insight into trends in “incentive” programs and 2010 expectations in a reader fore...
-
Recognize This! – “If managers just increased their praise and recognition of one employee once a day for 21 business days in a row, six mo...
-
A final post on recent industry research on engagement comes from BlessingWhite’s recent advice to “Align Your Hamsters & Honeymooners.”...
-
I know, this sounds counter intuitive, the companies that build recognition programs based upon catalogs of their pre-selected merchandise i...
-
And finally, our Grand Prize Winner in the Recognition Gone Wrong contest: “Here’s a great example about recognition gone wrong. I was work...
-
DHL Global Forwarding ’s Senior Director of Talent Management, Brent Biedermann, recently joined me for a webinar on how they’ve applied the...
-
Bloggers across industries and forums have been commenting on a recent Harvard Business Online article “Why Zappos Pays Employees to Quit – ...
How to Measure Employee Engagement Globally
A constant complaint about “employee engagement” is that the various research houses define engagement differently, offer different surveys to measure engagement, and then report those results in ways that mean different things in different environments and cultures. For example, Gallup found that Germany’s level of engaged employees is just 13%, but this new Barometer found 89% of German employees to be engaged or highly engaged.
What Barometer? The Conference Board (TCB) recently released a report (subscription required for full access) that attempted to find the common ground in the various approaches to employee engagement by coming to a single definition of engagement and provide a consistent measure for engagement everywhere in the world.
Adding to the litany of engagement definitions, here’s TCB’s: “An employee can be considered engaged if he or she is intellectually stimulated and passionate about his or her work, and demonstrates that through his or her intended actions.”
I like this definition because it speaks to both attitude and actions/results. TCB’s approach also eliminates perceived cultural perception differences to help a company truly understand the level of engagement across different cultural regions and then directly compare those results without “norming” for cultural differences, a process that introduces error into survey results.
What does this mean? In TCB’s words: “The state of mind called employee engagement is experienced in much the same way by workers throughout the world.”
What do you think about this definition of engagement and the idea of cultural universality? Is it too narrow? Too broad?
What Barometer? The Conference Board (TCB) recently released a report (subscription required for full access) that attempted to find the common ground in the various approaches to employee engagement by coming to a single definition of engagement and provide a consistent measure for engagement everywhere in the world.
Adding to the litany of engagement definitions, here’s TCB’s: “An employee can be considered engaged if he or she is intellectually stimulated and passionate about his or her work, and demonstrates that through his or her intended actions.”
I like this definition because it speaks to both attitude and actions/results. TCB’s approach also eliminates perceived cultural perception differences to help a company truly understand the level of engagement across different cultural regions and then directly compare those results without “norming” for cultural differences, a process that introduces error into survey results.
What does this mean? In TCB’s words: “The state of mind called employee engagement is experienced in much the same way by workers throughout the world.”
What do you think about this definition of engagement and the idea of cultural universality? Is it too narrow? Too broad?
6 comment(s):
Post a Comment | Subscribe to: Post Comments
At February 15, 2010 4:17 PM, Anonymous said...
I believe it is too narrow and only an incremental improvement upon the definition of job satisfaction. I believe that the defintion should also define what engaged employees are willing to do. I have also referenced back to Richard Walton's use of the phrase "high commitment." To me, an engaged employee is willing to exert discretionary effort above and beyond normal job requirements due to their passionate alignment with company goals and values.
robert edward cenek
www.cenekreport.com
At February 16, 2010 11:20 AM, Barbara A Hughes said...
I think the concept of "intellectual stimulation" is questionable. What about all of the artisans who bake bread, farm, paint houses, etc. Are they excluded from engagement because their pursuits are not necessarily intellectual in nature?
At February 16, 2010 11:28 AM, Derek Irvine said...
Robert, I agree fully with you. If you've read our blog before, you know that alignment with company values and objectives is a strategic theme with us. There is little value to recognition of effort outside of this.
One definition of engagement I've been particularly attracted to for the last several years is: "An output-based concept describing how aligned and committed employees are to the company, such that they are at their most productive." (from International School of Human Capital Management, Faculty of Employee Engagement, London, 2007)
Aligned and committed -- both very important. You don't want employees just working diligently; you want them producing in alignment with your strategic objectives. And you want them to be committed to the point they are willingly working harder to deliver.
At February 16, 2010 11:30 AM, Derek Irvine said...
You raise a good point, Barbara, but I would argue that artisans of any type, farmers, house painters are intellectually stimulated by and passionate about their work. Those who are constantly seek ways to do their work better, more efficiently, more beautifully, more expressively.
Of course, there are some in these fields who are not stimulated or passionate, but that is true of all fields.
At March 10, 2010 5:32 AM, Mike Klein said...
An interesting definition: "intellectually stimulated and passionate about their work". But problematic at a number of levels:
1) No mention of alignment with organization or its objectives
2) No relation between stimulation, passion and productivity
3) No view on how/whether that "stimulation, passion and creativity" supports cultures of innovation or of militant commitment to the status quo
Aside from being unable to aid in discerning whether "engaged employees" are flexibly interchangeable producing units or artistic-technical prima donnas who would fight the slightest change in work rules with strikes and sabotage, this definition appears yet another effort by the engagement fraternity to position itself as the source of happiness and productivity in the workplace, and of the idea that only workplaces that seek to engender this type of "happy productivity" are the only morally acceptable places to work.
In a world crying out for workplace innovation and flexibility, this kind of "enlightenment" may prove very expensive and counterproductive.
At March 19, 2010 5:16 PM, Derek Irvine said...
Ah, Mike, I encourage you to read my posts, especially those under the category "company values and recognition." You will see that alignment of recognition with company values and strategic objectives is one of our core five tenets that I preach nearly religiously.