As I mentioned in my last post, I had the great pleasure of facilitating a discussion at the second annual HR Reinvention Experiment. My talk was entitled “Kiss My Kettlebells: Examining Corporate Wellness”. I’m adding this to the Re-Engage site because one of the six key drivers of employee engagement that Leigh and I discuss is Employee Well Being, and this conversation about corporate wellness is perfectly aligned.

As I mentioned in my first post about the workshop, we spent time talking about our own journey in wellness. I am convinced we can more effectively assist others in their wellness journey if we are actively involved in our own.

In the second part of the workshop, we looked at the elements that make up successful wellness programs. For this section I cited information I heard earlier in their from Dr. William Baun, who heads the wellness effort at the MD Anderson Cancer Center. I had the pleasure of hearing him speak at the first annual Well Being Conference held in my hometown of Omaha. Bill and his colleagues authored a terrific article in the Harvard Business Review (this link will show you the first page or so of the article, but you will need a subscription to read the entire article, which I strongly encourage) that identified six elements that are common to some of the best corporate wellness programs in the country. They are:

1. Multilevel Leadership, passionate leaders at all levels,
2. Alignment, where wellness is a natural extension of the firm’s identify and aspirations,
3. Scope, Relevance and Quality, where wellness meets the unique needs of various employees,
4. Accessibility, so there is convenience to wellness resources,
5. Partnerships, that are both internal and external to the organization, and
6. Communications, that helps overcome apathy and can address sensitivities people may have about their wellness journey.

I had the great pleasure of presenting “Kiss My Kettlebells: Examining Corporate Wellness” at the second annual HR Reinvention Experiment, held last week at the Hot Shops Art Center in Omaha, Nebraska.

What a great discussion! I’m adding this to the Re-Engage site because one of the six key drivers of employee engagement that Leigh and I discuss is Employee Well Being, and this conversation about corporate wellness is perfectly aligned.

To give you a sense of our conversation, I first asked participants to explore their own wellness journey, a conversation that doesn’t always occur and frequently not easy. But I would contend that we will only be able to influence others in wellness if they believe we are active wellness participants– we simply need to be on that journey. If not, we risk looking like hypocrites, plain and simple.

For this exercise I asked them to think about where they were in seven key wellness categories. These categories were identified by Dr. Jerry Wagner, who was kind enough to offer them as a resource. You can find out more about them at his web site called Employee Wellness Collaborative.

I appreciated the honesty of the participants regarding where they were on the journey. One person talked about how they were working to improve their financial wellness, an often overlooked but increasingly important wellness category. The more challenging economic times have certainly put more stress on employees regarding their financial wellness. It was encouraging to hear one participant talk about the financial education programs they have offered their employees, and how that has improved morale and productivity. It’s clear providing resources in areas such as financial wellness will be more important for more employers.

Another participant talked about her challenges regarding career wellness. She has recently completed additional higher education, and is hoping to grow in her current employer. As she was sharing about her goals and dreams, tears welled in her eyes. We have people working with us right now who are also feeling strong emotions about where they are on their wellness journey, and we will gain more productive, committed employees if we can help them achieve their wellness goals.

And what about yours truly? Several months ago I was given some sobering information about those annoying health scores like cholesterol and blood pressure. They shook me up a bit, and by good fortune I was given the opportunity to participate in a corporate wellness program that featured these lovely little devices called kettlebells. Several months later I’m in far better shape, and am healthier than I’ve been in years. I’m a product of a corporate wellness initiative, where resources are invested to help employees. Can there be any argument that healthier employees are more productive employees? I told my wife she’s just going to have to figure out another way to get rid of me! In truth, I feel much better, and am glad I’ve gotten a little further along the wellness path.

How about you?

As promised, this is the second installment in my ongoing report of the results from our Decision to Leave survey at Keeping The People. More than 800 people have completed the post-exit survey to date, responding to the questions regarding a job they have left in their past. In our last e-letter, I reported on the reasons employees left. In this issue, I report on some of the kinds of events that trigger the decision to depart.

The Turning Point

In his distinguished lifetime of research on employee turnover, University of Washington professor, Dr. Thomas Lee has reported that there is a precipitating event or turning point in 66% of all employee turnover. I was curious to confirm this finding, so I included this question in our web survey:

Q: Was there a turning point in your final decision to leave your employer?

The results so far confirm Dr. Lee’s research:

Yes: 64% No: 36%

The triggering events cited fall into two major categories–push factors (such as abusive boss) and pull factors (such as an outside job offer), with the push factors outnumbering the pull factors almost four to one. Here’s a sampling of the comments describing “the last straw”, starting with those about respondents’ immediate managers:

• Being told that my best skills (organization and time management) were the ones I needed to work on.
• When my boss unfairly required me to arrange doctor’s appointments on evenings and weekends.
• Promotion denied; found out that boss did not even show up to meeting to discuss it.
• My employer didn’t want to “offend” two inefficient coworkers, tried to be a buddy to everyone.
• I couldn’t go get my son from daycare when he was sick without getting reprimanded
• Got negative reaction when I took time off to care for a terminally sick family member.
• Was denied a benefit which was given to another employee in the same position.
• The coworker the boss was sleeping with got promoted over me.
• Public recognition for someone who was not a team player/did not carry her weight.

Many comments refer to actions taken by more senior leaders:

• Seeing an unethical manager be promoted.
• Company owner swearing at a customer in an open internet forum.
• The arbitrary termination of half of the employees within one week.
• Announcement that WorldCom was buying MCI — Bernie Ebbers was just too sleazy for me.
• Significant staff turnover without a change in governance from the Board.
• Management treating professional staff like imbeciles, top-down communication only.
• They began to push the founder out, then fired her friends, it was not a good place to be.
• Was berated by an SVP who made me feel incompetent for making a small mistake.
• I saw the owner taking money from the till, and I quit the next morning.
• When my employer groped me to see if I was wearing underwear.
• Workload was excessive and the senior HR mgt were not listening to the concerns.
• Fell back on promise to pay me back for my Real Estate Course which they asked me to take.
• They moved me for my “protection” instead of removing the bullying manager and her minions.

Among the triggering event comments, there were slightly more comments about higher-ups than about the direct manager, providing a bit more evidence to our finding in our recent book, Re-Engage that senior leadership plays slightly more heavily than direct manager in the employee engagement equation.

Other turning points mentioned in the survey were less specific as to the root cause, but no less emotional:

• I couldn’t sleep at night thinking of having to go back in.
• I realized my job was literally making me sick!
• Realization that co-workers were not the people I wanted to be with professionally.
• Had a heart attack at work.

Pull-factor triggers/turning points were diverse:

• My Dream Job opened up at my professional society.
• New opportunity to work in a creative environment.
• Was accepted to grad school.
• We had our first child and decided we wanted to be closer to our parents and siblings.
• Received a $7,000 annual increase in pay with guaranteed work-from-home opportunity.
• Mental health issues
• The end of a 3-year $400 million project
• Paying my tuition

Sometimes the push and pull turning points coincided:

• Opportunity to spend more time with family as the company was quickly failing.
• Resolve that nothing would change and I needed to leave. Exciting new opportunity presented.

The bottom line for leaders and managers: keeping employees engaged is just as much about avoiding the triggers of disengagement as it is about doing the proactive things that spark engagement. We cannot prevent all turnover, nor do we want to, but being alert to the kinds of events that precipitate thoughts of leaving and other behavioral warning signs, we may be able to re-engage before it’s too late.

An executive in a professional services firm, known and recognized widely as an engaging, productive workplace, was working late at his office. Most folks had gone home for the night, but he stayed to finish an important report.

As he was packing his briefcase to leave he met the man who was contracted to clean the offices in the evening. The executive had met him before, and he stopped for some small talk.

As their conversation was ending, the janitor said: “People must really like working here”.

“What makes you say that”, inquired the executive.

“That’s easy”, said the janitor.  ”People who work here take care of things and treat the building and equipment with respect. They pick up after themselves. At other companies where I work stuff is trashed and broken. They don’t care about the place like employees here. It seems to me if you like where you work you care more about how the place looks. You’re more responsible.”

He’s right.

There’s plenty of research out there to support this idea, such as more engaged manufacturing facilities having less equipment problems because employees take better care of them, or more engaged retail establishments having less “shrinkage”, which is our politically correct euphemism for employee theft. We talk about this linkage of employee engagement and key business outcomes in chapter one of Re-Engage.

How we treat employees and what we do to develop a culture that engages our associates can ripple, felt by our employees and those with whom we interact beyond our payroll, such as customers, vendors and even outside contractors like the janitor.

Want to know whether your workplace is engaged? Ask your janitor.

(Photo courtesty of http://www.sxc.hu/photo/743360)

Since it went up in 2004, almost 800 visitors to the Keeping The People website , representing all major industries, position levels, functions, and age groupings, have taken the time to complete our “Decision to Leave” post-exit survey.  (If you haven’t taken it and would like to, go to www.keepingthepeople.com and click on Resources, then Surveys).  Respondents are asked to think of a job they quit in the past and respond to survey questions as they recall the reasons and circumstances of their departure.

Now it is time to report the results so far about reported reasons for leaving.

The survey presents respondents with a list of 39 possible reasons for leaving and asks them to select up to five that entered into their decision to leave their employer.  (Exact wording:  From the list below, please check up to but no more than five factors that first caused you to start thinking seriously about leaving your organization.)  The question  was worded this way in order to surface the root cause of the turnover, not necessarily the same reason the employee might give during an on-site exit interview.  Of the 39 reasons,  29 are “Push” factors related to an issue within the workplace and 11 are “Pull” factors indicating an external motivation.  Here, in order, are the reasons with the percentages of respondents who selected them:

Reported Reasons for Leaving:

1.  Lack of trust in senior leaders (10.6%)     Push

2.  Insufficient pay (5.7%)     Push

3.  Unhealthy/undesirable culture (5.5%)     Push

4.  Lack of concern for development (5.1%)     Push

5.  Lack of honesty/integrity/ethics  (4.9%)     Push

6.  Unfair treatment  (4.8%)     Push

7.  Lack of open communication  (4.6%)     Push

8.  Lack of encouragement of input or ideas  (4.6%)     Push

9.  Lack of teamwork among co-workers  (4.5%)     Push

10.  Excessive workload  (4.4%)     Push

11.  Lack of opportunity for training and development  (3.9%)     Push

12.  Lack of recognition (3.9%)     Push

13.  Lack of clear expectations (3.8%)     Push

14.  Uncertainty about future of company (3.8%)     Push

15.  Uninteresting or unchallenging work  (3.6%)     Push

16.  Not having needed resources (3.2%)     Push

17.  Pay not based on performance (2.6%)     Push

18.  Lack of encouragement of input or ideas (2.3%)     Push

19.  Unfair pay practices (2.1%)     Push

20.  Uncertainty about job security  (2.0%)     Push

21.  Lack of work-life balance (1.9%)     Push

22.  Negative relationship with coworker (1.7%)     Push

23. Decision to change careers (1.7%)     Pull

24.  Unexpected job/career opportunity (1.6%)     Pull

25.  Lack of focus on quality (1.5%)     Push

26.  Lack of feedback (1.5%)     Push

27.  Inflexible work arrangements (1.3%)     Push

28.  Lack of focus on productivity (1.2%)     Push

29.  Unsatisfactory benefits (1.0%)     Push

30.  Spend more time with family (.09%)     Push

31.  Excessive travel demands (.08%)     Push

32 . Desire to relocate (.07%)     Pull

33. Start a business (.05%)     Pull

34.  Desire to return to school (.05%)     Pull

35.  Start a family (.04%)     Pull

36.  Family emergency/illness (.04%)     Pull

37.  Spouse/partner relocation (.03%)     Pull

38. Retirement (.03%)     Pull

39. Inheritance/monetary windfall (.005%)     Pull

Analysis:

• Most Turnover is Avoidable. The vast majority of respondents–94%– report leaving for push reasons than for pull reasons–only 6%. These percentages are almost exactly the same as those reported in my analysis of post-exit data from the Saratoga Institute in The 7 Hidden Reasons Employees Leave (AMACOM, 2005). These more recent findings add still more evidence that most turnover is at least potentially preventable if there is a commitment to re-engage and keep the individual. Of course, we may not care to avoid some turnover, though it may be avoidable.
• Trust in Senior Leaders: The #1 Reason…But Why? The most-cited reason for leaving was lack of trust in senior leaders. This may surprise some and certainly runs counter to conventional wisdom that employees leave managers–usually interpreted as one’s immediate boss. However, this finding confirms the conclusion Mark Hirschfeld and I presented in our analysis of 2.1 million engagement surveys from 10,000 employers, as described in Re-Engage (McGraw-Hill, 2010)–that caring, competent, and trustworthy senior leadership is the number one driver of employee engagement. We believe this may be related to the events of the past 10 years–the fall from grace of many CEO found guilty of malfeasance, reports of disproportionate CEO compensation, and the greed of Wall Street senior executives before and after the financial collapse of 2008. CEOs, who were considered innocent until proven guilty, are now considered by many guilty until proven innocent. This generalized distrust may be having a dual and counterintuitive effect–increasing employee cynicism while at the same time raising expectations of CEO behavior at our own employers.
• Pay is A Significant Push Factor For Some. Insufficient pay was the second most-cited reason for leaving and continues to be a “dissatisfier” that causes some employees to move on. Actually, as you may have noticed, three of the 39 reasons are pay-related. When we add reasons #17 (Pay not based on performance) and #19 (Unfair pay practices), the percentage that selected pay-related reasons becomes 10.4%, still second to senior leadership, but a significant root cause for many. Note that reasons #17 and #19 have more to do with dissatisfaction with the way pay is determined, not the amount of pay per se–an important distinction.  Keep in mind also that respondents were asked to cite up to five reasons for leaving, so that pay may not be the number one reason, but one among a handful of others.
• Leaders and Managers Can Prevent the Push Factors. Reason #3–Unhealthy/undesirable culture–is mostly influenced by the values, mindsets, and standards of senior leaders, but also by managers who must be counted on to uphold the cultural values and people practices. Most of the remaining push factors in the list can be influenced and prevented by the actions of both senior leaders, managers, and supervisors. “Lack of work/life balance”, for example, is influenced by staffing/budget decisions and work/life policies made at the most senior levels, but also by the daily decisions of direct managers about granting time off to care for sick children and family emergencies, etc.

Conclusion:  Most of the reasons employees disengage and leave are avoidable, given the desire to retain, and the willingness to invest the time to take preventive or corrective actions.  This is good news, since most don’t require significant monetary investment.  Time is money, yes; but the cost of disengagement and turnover is greater.

A Final Question: More Pull, More Push, or Combination?

We asked respondents to choose the one of the following that best describes their  motivation to leave their  employer:

A. Motivated more by my dissatisfaction or desire to leave than by the attraction or availability of an outside opportunity.    (Selected by 55%)
B. Motivated more by the attraction or availability of an outside opportunity than by my dissatisfaction or desire to leave.    (Selected by 12%)
C.  Equally motivated by my dissatisfaction or desire to leave and the attraction or availability of an outside opportunity.     (Selected by 33%)

The finding that people are more than four times more likely to leave a job based on an internal issue than an outside opportunity would still come as a surprise to significant numbers of managers.  It is our mission (and I hope yours as well) to help spread the word.

In our next issue:  How you made the decision to leave, including turning points in the decision to leave, how long before you left, the effect of on your personal productivity of looking while employed but disengaged, and whether you told the truth about the real reason for leaving.

Thanks to all of you who have completed the survey and to all of you who will do so in the future.  I will continue to update readers on survey results, and will incorporate your responses into my update and revision of The 7 Hidden Reasons Employees Leave (2nd edition).

In studying employers who are recognized as “Best-Places-to-Work” we’ve identified effective teamwork (not “us” versus “them”) as one of the six critical drivers of employee engagement. Winning workplaces know how to make sure that everyone in the corporate sandbox knows how to work together effectively and, when necessary, manage the healthy conflict that inevitably comes when talented folks are brought together with a common goal.

I’m reminded of one youngster, Micah, who would be given the award “best kid in the sandbox” if such an accolade existed. He is intent on making sure that each of his playmates has a toy and hugs anyone who falls down and gets hurt. And when it’s time to sit down for the morning milk and cookie snack he turns into helper extraordinaire. Micah is only three, but he could teach a few employers we know about cooperation, team cohesiveness and productivity. Consider the following employees who see the “sandbox” where they work as one where arm-twisting, name-calling, and you-stole-my-shovel behavior is the norm:

“A lot of the individuals in the group are not team players.  They do things to only benefit themselves.  They do not cooperate nor does the manager make them. Workloads are not shared or distributed equally.  The manager does not get involved.”

“The stress level here is high and the pressure put on by the department leaders just make it harder to do your job. We all know our jobs in most cases what is needed to do them and do them right. But you have team leaders making life hell just to hear their own voices.”

On the other hand, many employers have developed cultures where the sandbox seems quite civil:

“We can turn to each other for help, or to ask if another team member has run into a similar problem and how the problem was solved. Our team works well together, and if one of us gets stuck with a project, the other one will either volunteer to help, or if that is not  possible, will take some of the workload, so we don’t get behind.”

“This place rocks.  I took a cut in pay from my big corporate employer to come and work someplace where people believe in what they are working towards and enjoy coming to work.  I feel bad for those that dread going to work each morning.  Smartest move I’ve made in my professional career.”

The industrialist Henry Ford said: “Coming together is a beginning. Keeping together is progress. Working together is success.” Winning workplaces create engaging cultures characterized by success in getting employees to work together. How’s your workplace culture? Is it a “kick sand in your face” or “build sand castles” kind of culture? In a world that is getting smaller every day, through globalization, new technologies, telecommuting, remote locations, and social networking, it makes a world of difference.

At a recent Best-Places-to-Work award event each employer who was recognized for their exceptional level of employee engagement was given very specific instructions on what to say in their acceptance speech. As they came to the podium to receive their award they were each asked to respond to the following: “In ten words or less, describe why your company is a great place to work.”

Here are a few of the responses (not all in the ten word limit), but worth examining:

• “Passionate, zany culture with remarkable service.”
• “Great people who love brutally competitive athletic competitions.”
• “Hire passionate people and unleash them.”
• “Mission made possible by exceptional people.”
• “Corporate social responsibility is alive and well.”
• “Challenge each of our partners to the best every day.”
• “Our team gets to live summer camp every day.”
• “We exist to build great things through great people.”
• “We’re 100% employee owned and don’t work for a rich guy.”
• “Fun loving people with great interest rates. Call us!”
• “An environment for great people to become exceptional.”
• “Care for employees. They care for customers. The rest takes care of itself.”
• “It’s an honor to serve our customers.”
• “Golden Age of biology. What could be more exciting?”
• “It’s easy to love your job when you get to help patients and do it in jeans.”

Mind you, these were all given impromptu, but they show a passion and care for their employees. The most applause went to the financial services firm who ended their statement with “call us”. Clever, but indicative of their culture.

You’ll also note they’re different. They don’t all focus on the same thing, which fits with what we see in the most engaging employers, those who take the building blocks of great workplaces and add their unique “spin”. We call this evolution turning “employee engagement universal drivers into signature drivers.” The great cultures we’ve studied have many elements in common, but they’re able to forge those elements into something that fits who they are. In doing so their culture is more bullet-proof, one that can withstand the elements.

How would you, in ten words or less, describe why your company is a great place to work? I’ve used this question in workshops and conferences since then, and I highly recommend you start asking it where you work:

• Try it at a staff meeting.
• Talk to the human resources recruiters who are out in the market and see what they’re saying to prospective employees.
• Take a few minutes at a senior leadership meeting and see what kind of discussion you have.
• Ask a few valued customers.

This exercise might sound straightforward, but don’t let its simplicity fool you. I’m guessing it might create worthwhile dialog. You might note, for example, that some of your associates have trouble coming up with any description about why you’re a great place to work-might that be a problem? Or how would you feel if you did this with a group of your leaders and they couldn’t agree with what makes this a great workplace-that’s a problem too, right?

I think companies with highly engaged workplaces do a lot of things right, and one of the outcomes of their efforts is they have a language about people stuff. It’s a language that aligns them. It’s a language that makes talking about certain things much easier.

Ten words to describe why you’re a great place to work. Try it.

Could the organizational culture of a hospital impact patient health? Put more bluntly, can a poor culture kill patients? According to recent research, reported by the Wall Street Journal Health Blog, the answer is yes.

Researchers from Yale studied the top 5% of hospitals whose patients were still alive 30 days after a heart attack, and compared those results to the bottom 5% of hospitals. Their findings, published in the Annals of Internal Medicine conclude:

Hospitals in the high-performing and low-performing groups differed substantially in the domains of organizational values and goals, senior management involvement, broad staff presence and expertise in AMI (acute myocardial infarction) care, communication and coordination among groups, and problem solving and learning.

What does a “healthy” hospital culture look like? The researchers report on a number of factors, including how mistakes are viewed and the regard given all hospital employees. From the Wall Street Journal blog, citing Leslie Curry, one of the Yale researchers:

Using mistakes as learning experiences as opposed to reasons for punishment was another characteristic of top performers, Curry says. And views of nurses, pharmacists, technicians and even housekeeping staff were highly valued in the team approach used at the best hospitals, she added.

A few years ago I conducted a study of employee engagement at twenty U.S. hospitals. They were the top and bottom ten in employee engagement rankings from a national sample, provided to me by the research firm Quantum Workplace. 

What differentiated the top 10 hospitals from the bottom 10? My analysis revealed that employees at the highest-scoring hospitals are more likely to have:

• A strong feeling that the senior leadership of the hospital is committed to making it a great place to work and truly values employees as their most important resource,
• Confidence in the organization’s future success and an understanding of how the employees contribute to that success,
• Open and honest communication between employees and managers,
• A sense that the hospital is committed to investing in employees, an investment that will help them develop their careers,
• Opportunities for employees to be recognized when they contribute to the organization’s success,
• Fair pay for their contributions, and
• Benefits that are not perceived as typical of other organizations.

An employee at a bottom ten hospital summarized how she believes the culture where she works impacts the health and safety of patients:

Employee morale is reflected daily in patient care. I work on a unit where our director does not know our names, or interact with us. Although she is a nice person, her personality comes off as uncaring. This creates anger and frustration on the unit with the staff which creates less caring behavior for our patients. If the hospital wants its retention rate to increase or stabilize, they need to take the time to ensure that employees are well taken care of, and that their needs are being met.

These studies point to the same challenge-the culture of a hospital can impact patient mortality. Having honest discussions about hospital culture needs to occur more frequently and steps should be taken to build a more engaging, healthier culture.

Patient lives depend on it.

I encourage anyone interested in employee engagement to read a report recently released by The The Economist (co-sponsored by The Hay Group), titled “Re-engaging with engagement: Views from the boardroom on employee engagement” .  The report is based on a survey of 331 C-suite executives or senior directors from 19 industries in Europe and the Middle East.  I would be interested in hearing from readers in the U.S. (and internationally) about whether you believe the findings also apply to senior executives in your country, or in your company.

The Survey Findings:

The most disturbing findings were these:

• 84% of survey respondents say that “disengaged employees” are one of the three biggest threats facing their business.  Yet, only 12% report that their companies “regularly and often” confront staff with “continually low engagement.”  C-suite executives themselves admit that employee engagement is discussed “occasionally”, “rarely,” or “never” at board level in 43% of companies.
• More than one in five in the C-suite believe that employees are “much more engaged” than those in rival firms, compared with only 7% of respondents outside the C-suite.
• 47% of C-suite executives believe that they themselves “have determined the levels of employee engagement” in their companies, a view shared by only 16% of senior directors outside the C-suite.  Only 13% of C-suite executives believe that line managers and middle managers are “chiefly responsible” for staff engagement.

My Take:

I was not surprised by the first two findings.  My experience has led me to agree with the report’s conclusion that “a sizeable discrepancy exists between what companies say about the perils of disengagement and how far they will actually go to confront the problem.”  This describes most companies, but not the minority whose CEOs are committed to building best-place-to-work cultures–CEOs like Jim Sinegal at Costco, Kip Tindell at The Container Store, Vineet Nayar of HCL Technologies, Tony Hsieh at Zappos.com, Howard Schultz at Starbucks, Dr. Kim Hoogeveen at Quality Living, Inc., or Graham Weston at Rackspace Hosting (these last two are profiled in our new book, Re-Engage: How America’s Best Places to Work Inspire Extra Effort in Extraordinary Times, co-authored with Mark Hirschfeld).  The business success of these companies speaks for itself that employee engagement works.

Now that “employee engagement” has reached true fad/buzzword status, many CEOs have pretended to embrace it by jumping on the engagement survey bandwagon.  But alas, many have not followed through by acting on employee ideas and feedback.  I think most CEOs no longer need convincing that employee engagement is vital to business success, though some, incredibly, still express doubt. The main reason most CEOs don’t aggressively tackle the employee disengagement issue, I believe, is that it appears “soft” and overwhelmingly difficult (soft = hard) to do so.  After all, in many cases it would mean a complete overhauling of the culture.  Most CEOs, especially at public companies, would much rather, in their boardroom discussions, deal with the nearer-term topic of how to increase quarterly profits.  The irony is, of course, that the surest way to increase profits is to build a culture where engaged employees consistently exceed customer expectations.

The finding that many CEOs are more optimistic than their subordinates about how engaged their employees are compared to rival firms is not surprising considering that most CEOs are generally optimistic and take seriously their role as cheerleader.  The cause for concern lies in the fact that they may be isolated from the reality that those one level down can see more clearly.

Good News, Bad News

What I did not expect to see in the survey was the degree of responsibility that CEOs take for controlling levels of employee engagement in their companies.  This should be good news.  But, if almost half of CEOs believe they are the prime mover of employee engagement in their companies, why are so many not doing more to drive it?  Our analysis of 2.1 million employee engagement surveys from 10,000 employers (in partnership with Quantum Workplace) does indeed show that senior leaders influence employee engagement slightly more than direct managers in that they do set the tone, embody the values, and convey the culture.  But it would be a mistake for CEOs not to hold middle managers equally responsible for driving up levels of employee engagement, just as it would be a mistake to not hold all employees responsible for keeping themselves engaged.  The fact that only 16% of those who report to CEOs agree that CEOs are the primary drivers of engagement suggests that lower-level leaders are more than ready to share the responsibility.

“People Leave Managers, Not Companies”…Up to a Point

I  have facilitated too many post-survey action planning sessions in which middle managers, after identifying the corrective steps they can and must take, come to the inevitable point where they say “we can only do so much.”  Some things, they correctly point out, only CEOs, their boards, and more senior leaders control and decide–things like clarification of company direction, overall staffing/workload levels, work/life policies, general pay/benefits, recognition budgets, and many other vital levers of employee engagement.  It’s up to those of us in HR-related roles to help them see the connections and trust us to advise them on the truest path to engaging leadership.

So, What Do You Think?

I welcome your responses to these questions:

• Who truly influences levels of employee engagement more in your company–senior leaders or direct managers?
• What actions should HR leaders take to help C-suite leaders sort out which employee engagement initiatives to take?

by Mark Hirschfeld and Leigh Branham

This was originally posted by our friends Joe Gerstandt and Jason Lauritsen at Talent Anarchy. Be sure to check out their fine blog!

*******************

This message begins with a disclosure: We earn a great deal of our living helping collect, analyze and create metrics for employers across the United States.

We’re data guys.

You could call us data nerds or data geeks or data commandos and our feelings wouldn’t be hurt one bit. You are certainly welcome to keep this in mind as we respond to the remarks of Joe Gerstandt and Jason Lauritsen and their recent tête-à-tête at Talent Anarchy.

Jason and Joe have offered us a refreshingly candid discussion around a very important question, that being the use of metrics in the effort to build great workplaces. We’re grateful for the opportunity to weigh in on this topic.

Over 110 years ago a German physicist, Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen, brought radiography, or what we more commonly call x-rays, into practical use. The technology, as it was initially designed, had major flaws. For one, in the case of its use as a diagnostic tool in medicine, it creates a two-dimensional representation of a three-dimensional object. Because of this weakness there are times when the radiographic picture is inaccurate. There is distortion. The image on a flat x-ray cannot accurately represent the length and width and girth of our body. Early applications of x-rays hurt patients, as well-intended medical researchers slowly lurched the technology forward.

Mark once read that what we know about predicting human behavior is roughly equivalent to medicine in the Middle Ages. That might be a bit dramatic, but it makes an important point-our ways of measuring things like employee engagement are still in their infancy. How we go about measuring human-related “stuff” isn’t as good as it should be right now.

But we’ll get better at it, and we think it’s worth the effort.

There are some crappy metrics out there and metrics being used in the wrong way. Profit, for example, may not always be seen by all as the most worthy goal, though it is highly measurable.  What is more worthy is creating something of value that employees feel good about, and feeling engaged in the creation of it.  The irony is that by initiating and tracking progress on the people metrics, the mystery of how to increase profits is often revealed.  Too many leaders just don’t get it that engagement, for example, is not a program or gold watch or “billion-business-book-of-the-month-club”. It is a leading indicator of customer service, profitability, and value creation…and that the building blocks of employee engagement can be measured in several ways.  Progress doesn’t have to mean “always more,” but it can mean “always better”.

In our travels we’ve met those who use metrics as a sledge hammer, seemingly thinking that employee engagement is about getting one more morsel of flesh out of employees. They may get their pound of flesh, but they’ll never get the sustainable business results for which they pine. One of our favorite horror stories is about an executive who heard that a “great workplace” used green M&M’s as a way of celebrating with employees when the company had a success. This executive decided to bring green M&M’s into his company as a way of creating a more engaged workplace. He was bitterly disappointed that a year later his employees still didn’t think it was good place to work. This ignoramus didn’t understand that the green M&M’s at this company he had read about were a symbol behind which there was significant substance, most importantly a remarkable culture that had been built and nurtured over many years. The best metrics in the world won’t save this dope from himself, nor his company from languishing.

We also have some folks out there, in some cases well-intended, who don’t understand how to use human capital metrics properly and, as a result, make a general mess of things. We often do a horrible job of helping leaders understand how to use tools and resources available to help them be more effective serving and supporting the workplaces they have the privilege to lead.

There are some things we may not ever be able to measure. We may not be able to measure honesty, compassion, and courage, but we can measure the results that those traits produce–lower voluntary turnover, lower quit rates, fewer grievances filed, more internal job progressions allowed, more customers returning more frequently and referring their friends, more managers coaching (often confronting), recognizing (more often) and giving constructive feedback, more new employees being hired through referrals from happier, more engaged employees–all measures of not just more, but of better places to work that do indeed serve as measures of progress toward becoming a remarkable workplace. 

Many of us dream of a world of work that is different than what most now experience. We hope for a workplace where leaders actually give a damn about the people in their employ. Wouldn’t it be great:

• If a CEO was notified by employees that a new product offering “embarrassed them”, that the CEO took those concerns seriously and immediately changed the product because he always wanted his employees to take pride in their work and their company?
• A company, in the midst of difficult times, encouraged and helped their employees find new jobs if they couldn’t get them enough hours in their current job?
• Terminated employees who were a poor fit for a job would feel so positive about their work experience that they would refer family and friends to their former employer?
• An employer would have such a strong, caring, engaging culture, that when they were forced to have layoffs that all their former employees willingly returned when the economy turned around?
• An executive team would freely give up their employer funded 401(k) match so that money could be distributed to entry-level employees who participated in the company retirement program?

These aren’t dreams or hopes. Each of these is true.

They come from employers we have had the pleasure of learning about through our research. There may not be many of these places, but they do exist. We wish there were more, and one goal in writing Re-Engage was to inspire other employers that creating and maintaining an engaging workplace can be achieved and that the sometimes arduous, frequently challenging journey is worth it.

There are remarkable leaders out there like the ones we profile, who are doing remarkable things in the world of work. They care deeply. They have compassion and love in their hearts. And along with their hearts, they also have a passion for making sure they’re measuring how well they’re doing in their efforts to create and maintain a great place to work.  

To them this is not an either-or, false-choice proposition- either they care about folks or they care about metrics. With every fiber that is in them they embrace this paradox and care about both.

To them, engagement survey results or other metrics are just like the x-ray. They are crude two-dimensional representations of a three-dimensional living organism called an employer. These leaders use metrics as a way to start a discussion with employees, not as the final answer. They use metrics to support having an honest conversation with a supervisor who isn’t captivating and inspiring her/his employees. They use metrics to inform their gut instinct, not replace it. They use metrics as a guide in making important decisions, not the final word.

One company we’ve worked with achieved a significant year-over-year increase in the results of the employee engagement survey we conduct. The increases were in areas like breaking down unnecessary silos that got in the way of employees working together and having managers who were perceived as more open and honest in their communication with employees. Employees felt more appreciated when they contributed to the success of the business, and perceptions that senior leadership truly cared about building a great workplace were on the rise. These survey results came from efforts on the part of a leadership team that has devoted themselves for over two years to build a more engaging workplace.

They also had one of their best years financially in a long time.

To them, and us, their financial success is not coincidental. These leaders did not achieve this by luck or chance. By thoughtfully and patiently building a great workplace their financial success was, in our view, an inevitable, even natural, result.

No metric we can create or conceive can turn a poor leader from wreaking pain, havoc and agony with every step they take to the employees who fall in their path. But the right metrics used in the right way in the hands of caring leaders can achieve much.

(pic courtesy http://www.sxc.hu/photo/565371)