Engagement is all about getting employees to ‘give it their all’. Various research studies show a strong connection between an employee’s level of engagement and the level and quality of work performance.

Elements of engagement

The concept of engagement has naturally evolved from past research on high involvement, empowerment, job motivation, organizational commitment and trust.

Dr. Paul Bernthal (2009) proposes that engagement comprises of individual value, focused work, and interpersonal support with the following sub-components that further define the meaning of engagement:

• Individual Value - Employees feel more engaged when they are able to make a unique contribution, experience empowerment, and have opportunities for personal growth.  The perception of meaningful work is one of the most influential factors in determining employees’ willingness to stay with an organization.
• Focused Work – Employees feel more engaged when they have clear direction, performance accountability and an efficient work environment.
• Interpersonal Support – Employees feel more engaged when they work in a safe, cooperative environment.

Work related roles

“Role theory” reviews different roles that people engage in at work and explains reasons why people engage in certain roles and not in others (Welbourne, 2003). Engagement is about what people do at work.  The Five work-related roles differentiated are:

1. Job holder role – employees come to work and do the job that is listed in their job description.

2. Team member role – employees go “above and beyond” to help members of their team work toward common goals.

3. Entrepreneur role – employees come up with new ideas and processes and try to get those ideas implemented.

4. Career role – employees do things to enhance their career in the organization; they learn, they adapt new skills and more.

5. Organization member role – employees do things that promote and help the company even if it’s not part of their jobs or their team’s duties.

Employee engagement and performance measurement

Researches on employee engagement use different approaches.  According to the global workforce study conducted by Tower Perrins, only a fifth of the respondents can be categorized as engaged (Towers Perrin, 2008). The largest segment, over 40%, is the so-called “enrolled,” perhaps best described as capable but not fully committed. The four categories of employees engagement are presented below:

Source: Towers Perrin, 2008

The same  workforce study reveals that a spread of more than 5% in operating margin and more than 3% in net profit margin was observed between the companies with high employee engagement and those with low engagement. How  engagement affects financial performance and retention in companies is illustrated in the figure below.

Source: Towers Perrin, 2008 (click on the image for larger size)

Another employee engagement research approach was developed by Gallup Consulting, which uses 12 questions (Q12) to measure the employee engagement (Gallup Consulting, 2008). Gallup’s latest meta-analysis (an analysis of data from more than 152 organizations) shows dramatic differences between top and bottom quartile workgroups on key business outcomes, as it is revelead in the the figure below:

Source: Gallup Consulting, 2008, 2010

Answers to the Gallup’s questions (Q12) that measure employee engagement correlate with retention, productivity, customer engagement and safety.

Why is important to measure engagement?

Some companies use engagement scores as lead measures in their HR scorecards. When an organization can show the relationship between engagement scores and bottom-line outcomes, everyone pays attention to the engagement index. Establishing this critical link between people and performance helps HR professionals prove that people-related interventions are a worthwhile investment.

How do you measure the employee engagement in your firm?

For further examples of performance measures and reports explore the Human Resources KPIs in practice section of smartkpis.com (smartKPIs.com 2010). The employee engagement index is available at: http://www.smartkpis.com/kpi-key-performance-indicator/employee-engagement-index-1836.html

References

Bernthal P. 2009, Measuring Employee Engagement, Development Dimensions International, Inc., available at: http://www.ddiworld.com/pdf/ddi_MeasuringEmployeeEngagement_wp.pdf

Gallup Consulting 2008 -2010, Employee Engagement , What’s Your Engagement Ratio?, available at: http://www.gallup.com/consulting/52/employee-engagement.aspx and  http://www.gallup.com/consulting/121535/Employee-Engagement-Overview-Brochure.aspx

Towers Perrin 2008, Global Workforce Survey, Closing the Engagement Gap: A Road Map for Driving Superior Business Performance, available at: http://www.towersperrin.com/tp/getwebcachedoc?webc=HRS/USA/2008/200803/GWS_Global_Report20072008_31208.pdf

Welbourne T. 2003, Employee Engagement: Doing It vs. Measuring, available at: http://www.eepulse.com/documents/pdfs/HR.com-9-8-03.pdf

It is widely known that organizations have traditionally relied on financial measures to determine their organizational value, success and financial performance through measures such as profitability, revenue or return on investment. It is also known that many soft measures or human oriented measures of traits, attitudes and behavior became in the last two decades more and more important determinants of employees and organizational performance (Peterson et al, 2001).

Many studies have shown the relationship that forms between employee cognitive attitudes, personality traits and job performance. However it was not clear until recently what is precisely the connection between all these components and how they can drive and determine organizational performance outcomes.

After 25 years of interviewing and surveying employees and managers the Gallup Organization has coined Employee Engagement Index as a driving force of the organization success and performance. (Little et al, 2006). The studies show that Employee Engagement Index has a significant implications for customer satisfaction, sustainable growth, real profit increase, stock increase, productivity and employee retention among the most important influenced factors (Gallup Consulting, 2008).

What is Employee Engagement?

Many academics and consultants tried to come with a definition of how employee engagement can be actually defined. Debates and research are still underway, but a common framework seems to emerge from the research work.

Many practitioners consider employee engagement a measure that reflects the extent to which employees contribute through their effort and enthusiasm to the success and performance of their organization.

In the same line of thought Crim et al (2006) consider that an engaged employee is a person inspired, fascinated, fully involved, and committed for its work and willing to see the organization succeeding in its mission. Accordingly, Sacks (2006) associates employee engagement with a sustainable workload, feelings of choice and control, recognition, fairness and justice, a supportive work community and meaningful and valued work.

How is Employee Engagement Index measured?

Employee Engaged Index is based on a survey questionnaire that assess the employees effort and enthusiasm at work and can vary from organization to organization. According with the researchers and consultants from Burke, a leading international research and consulting firm, there are 6 important engagement components that determine a substantive Employee Engagement Index:

• Company: satisfaction with the working environment and likeliness to withstand other job offers on the market

• Manager: satisfaction with the mangers

• Work group: satisfaction with the current working group: colleagues and managers

• The job: satisfaction with the job

• Career/ Profession : satisfaction with the choice of career and career perspectives

• Customer: Satisfaction with the working relationship had with customers/clients

Employee Engagement Index: Analysis and outcomes

According with the research studies underpinned by the Gallup Organization it appears that engaged employees are more productive, more customer focused and more likely to withstand temptations to leave the organization.

The same studies frame employees in three categories:

• engaged – work with passion and are profoundly connected to the organization values

• not engaged – put time but not passion in their work and they are not connected to the organizational values

• actively disengaged – employee busy to act out their unhappiness and undermine what their engaged colleagues try to accomplish ( Crim et al, 2006)

Based on these categories Gallup built the Engagement ratio which according with them is a macro level indicator that allows organizations to track the ratio of engaged to actively disengaged employees.

The results show that:

• In average the ratio of engaged to actively disengaged employees is 1,5 to 1

• In world class organization (successful organizations) the ratio of engaged to actively disengaged employees is 8 to 1

This difference between the engagement ratio for average and world class organizations is translated in the way a suite of  performance indicators are affected by employee engagement and how in the end they affect consequently the bottom line of the organization. (see graph below, Gallup – Employee Engagement)

As we have seen above employee engagement has a direct influence on a series of other performance measures which in the end consequently determine and drive the performance outcome of an organization. In this context, as the Gallup researchers acknowledge, for successful organizations the Employee Engagement Index transcends from a human resource initiative, “into a strategic approach supported by tactics for driving improvement and organizational change”

For more resources and information on human resource management please visit our performance measures and KPIs database on smartkpis.com.

References:

• Sacks, M. Allen (2006): Antecedents and consequence of employee engagement, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol 21, No 7, pp 606-619

• Peterson, J. Suzanne and Luthans, Fred (2002): Implications for managerial effectiveness and development, Journal of Management Development, Vol 21, No 5, pp 376-387

• Crim, Dan and Seijts, H. Gerrard (2006): What engages employees the most or, The ten C’s of employee engagement, Ivey Business Journal, March/April

• Little, Beverly and Little, Philip (2006): Employee engagement: Conceptual issues, Journal of Organizational Culture, Communication and Conflict, Vol 10, No 1, pp 111-120

• Burke Consulting, Employee Engagement and Retention Management, available at www.burke.com (accessed 7 March 2010)

• Gallup Consulting (2008), Employee Engagement: What’s your engagement ratio?, available at www.gallup.com (accessed 7 March 2010)