The End (Performance) that Justifies the Means (Employee Engagement)

The End (Performance) that Justifies the Means (Employee Engagement)

What outcomes leaders can expect when they invest in employee engagement

 

istockphoto.com

Recently, I’ve made the case that employee engagement can be defined and measured as an attitude regarding one’s work in one’s organization comprising feelings of energy, dedication and absorption; a perception of empowerment, and motivation to act in the service of the organization’s goals. I’ve argued that it’s helpful to draw lines around the idea of employee engagement because the better you define it, the better you can measure it; and the better you can measure it, the more closely you can manage it.

Of course, in reality, employee engagement is for most companies, a preferred means to a end, and not an end in itself. That desired outcome is business performance. But what performance indicators does engagement drive, and how?

According to many agencies specializing in employee engagement including AON Hewett and Gallup, employee engagement leads to: profitability through productivity, sales, customer satisfaction, customer loyalty, customer-focus, safety, and employee retention. The interviewees I spoke with during my dissertation research concurred, and added: going the extra mile, speaking highly of the company, collaboration, staying late, putting in extra hours, assisting colleagues, sharing knowledge, participating in organizational dialogue, and more. My dissertation research demonstrated that employee engagement is correlated to proactive problem-solving, creativity, productivity, intention to stay with an organization and likelihood of recommending one’s organization as an employer.

What’s clear from the above is that an investment in improving employee engagement is likely to drive both individual-level and firm level benefits. And the more that leadership removes barriers that stand between employees and performance, the better the results.

One of the most interesting findings of my research is that different aspects of employee engagement as I define it above are of different importance, depending upon the outcome in relationship to which you position engagement. For example, absorption, or being lost in ones work such that time passes quickly, doesn’t much effect the likelihood of recommending the firm as an employer, but it plays a big role in creativity.

What this tells us is that in many ways, the potential of understanding employee engagement is still untapped. If we can identify the degree to which different aspects of engagement effect desired outcomes, we can design interventions that improve the most important component of engagement to that outcome. That means more efficient and effective interventions. And what business leader doesn’t want to know that they are getting the very best return on their investment in employee engagement?