3ytgeaf

Chapter 3: The Barriers to Engagement
“The first barrier was that these top managers believed that their status in the
organisation was evidence enough that they ‘had what it took’ to be regarded as
a leader, and regarded their development as therefore unnecessary. Nonetheless,
they believed that the managers below them needed it. However, when the
managers returned to the workplace with a clearer idea of what leadership
should look like, they became much more aware of the poor quality of leadership
role-modelled by their senior managers, and their frustrations increased. This was
deepened by another major problem, which was that when the managers
attempted to implement their learning, their suggestions for improvement were
rejected or ignored by their somewhat defensive and/or reactionary bosses.
“The result was disenchantment, greater cynicism and lower morale among the
manager group, who eventually stopped making any suggestions or trying new
ways of leading.” (Quoted in CIPD Research Insight, Engaging Leadership:
creating organisations that maximise the potential of their people).
Underestimating engagement
22 Respondents to the review expressed concern that some leaders regarded employee
engagement as another job on the to-do list that could be ticked off once an annual
staff survey had been carried out, and the results, perhaps, delegated to HR and line
managers to fix. This is to miss the point that keeping employees engaged is an
on-going process that needs to be hard wired into an organisation’s DNA. The
British Association of Communicators in Business emphasised the importance of the
chief executive and the senior management team seeing this issue as “an integral
part of higher-level strategic activity rather than something they are supposed to do,
but that is not a core function.” 99
23 Nor is engagement something that can be achieved overnight. Professor John
Purcell in a note to the review pointed out that the need for quick results did not sit
easily with the extent of culture change that might be needed.
24 There can be an over-emphasis on measurement at the expense of change. Indeed
to carry out a survey and then not follow it through by implementing changes
based on that survey’s results, is more likely to disengage staff than not doing a
survey in the first place. Two employees quoted by the Henley Centre illustrate the
damage done when lip service is paid to engagement 100 :
99
Submitted to MacLeod Review by email, Call for Evidence
100
Henley Centre of HR Excellence
71