PDF of this item - The Institute for Employment Studies

More documents

Recommendations

Info

18 The HR Agenda for 2010Leadership: engaging the 'teenies'ISSUE4Dilys Robinson, Principal Research FellowEngagement and the recessionWhen we first embarked on our research into employee engagement in 2002 1 , itseemed to be a fair‐weather concept, designed to firstly maximise the retention ofhigh‐performing employees, and secondly increase the commitment and thereforethe productivity of average performers. Over the years, engagement has developedand matured and now appeals much more strongly to people’s emotional attachmentto, and belief in, their organisations and what they stand for. This does not mean ithas lost its hard edge, however, as there is clear evidence that engagement is linkedto individual and organisational performance. Companies that have invested heavilyin engagement (such as Sainsbury’s) believe that engagement is a good forwardindicator – ie that increased levels of engagement are likely to lead to improvedperformance, and vice versa. Although there is relatively little research to prove thiscausal link, the body of evidence is growing.In the early days of employee engagement, attention was mainly focused on how tomeasure it, and on the actions organisations could take to drive it up. More recently,there has been a lot of interest in the role of leaders at all levels in the organisation,from supervisors and first line managers right up to the chief executive, in engagingemployees in a sustainable way. It is interesting to note that engagement has notfallen out of fashion during the recession; if anything the reverse is true, as there is awidespread belief that engaged employees are the people who will keep companiesafloat during hard times, and help them recover and thrive when things get better.This has led to strenuous efforts to avoid redundancies if at all possible, for exampleby offering reduced hours or temporary lay‐offs.1This research led to the publication of two reports:Robinson D, Perryman S, Hayday S (2004), The Drivers of Employee Engagement, IES Report 408Robinson D, Hooker H, Hayday S (2007), Engagement: The Continuing Story, IES Report 447
Leadership: engaging the 'teenies' 19Another aspect of engagement is the difference between the public and privatesectors. The economy influences these sectors in different ways, with privatecompanies being more immediately affected. The public sector – particularly localgovernment and health – is preparing for the worst in terms of financial constraintsover the next two years, just as many private sectors are expecting to go into recoverymode. Another difference between the two sectors is that employees in the publicsector often owe their loyalty and commitment less to the specific organisation theywork for (NHS trust, local council, government department etc.) and more to thewider ideal – the NHS as a whole, or public service in general.What is engagement, and why does it matter?There is no single accepted definition of engagement. Academics, the CIPD,consultancies, survey houses, and organisations themselves have all produced theirown definitions. These tend to differ in subtle ways. Company definitions oftenemphasise a sense of identity with the organisation and beneficial outcomes such asincreased discretionary effort, while consultancy definitions stress individualmotivation and commitment, and academics focus more on the individual’s positivestate of mind. Both the CIPD and IES have somewhat ambitiously attempted toencapsulate all the aspects of engagement into one (long) definition, andinterestingly both stress that engagement cannot be required, as engagement is atwo‐way process. IES’s definition, created after consultation with 46 of our membercompanies, is in the box below.IES’s definition of employee engagement‘Employee engagement is a positive attitude held by the employee towards theorganisation and its values. An engaged employee is aware of business context andworks with colleagues to improve performance within the job for the benefit of theorganisation. The organisation must work to develop and nurture engagement, whichrequires a two-way relationship between employer and employee.’Does it really matter that there are so many definitions? Probably not, because whenpeople are asked to describe an engaged employee, almost everyone comes up withthe same things. An engaged employee:■ believes in the organisation and its values (affective commitment)■ ‘talks it up’ to friends and relatives (positive advocacy)■ goes the extra mile if required (discretionary effort)■ works well in teams, and helps others to succeed (organisational citizenship).In summary, an engaged employee works to make the organisation better.
Page 1 and 2: theHR Agendafor 2010ten top trends
Page 3: ContentsIntroduction 1Issue 1: Work
Page 6 and 7: 2 The HR Agenda for 2010Issue 3: Th
Page 8 and 9: 4 The HR Agenda for 2010Workforce p
Page 10 and 11: 6 The HR Agenda for 2010Eight steps
Page 12 and 13: 8 The HR Agenda for 2010Many source
Page 14 and 15: 10 The HR Agenda for 2010These are
Page 16 and 17: 12 The HR Agenda for 2010Staff coul
Page 18 and 19: 14 The HR Agenda for 2010Direction
Page 20: 16 The HR Agenda for 2010acquire. S
Page 25 and 26: Leadership: engaging the 'teenies'
Page 27 and 28: Refocusing coaching for the upturn
Page 33 and 34: Managing talent in tough times 29So
Page 35 and 36: Performance and reward management b
Page 41 and 42: Managing older employees: act your
Page 49 and 50: The role of organisational developm
Page 55 and 56: Transforming HR for the future 51Th
Page 57 and 58: Transforming HR for the future 53De

PDF of this item - The Institute for Employment Studies

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?