Talent Management specialists wanted

We've enjoyed strong growth over the past year and we now have opportunities for full and part-time Talent Mangement specialists to support the people-implementation of our leading talent management software.

Contact us via our Information Request page.

Is there a connection between Employee Engagement and Talent Management?

In this blog we draw on research conducted by the Institute of Employment Studies (IES) in both 2003 & 2007 (Drivers of Engagement) and 2008 (Human Capital Measurement), Henley Management College’s own study in 2005 and our own work in this field.

What is employee engagement?

Employee engagement has risen in popularity over the past few years. Some enthusiastic pundits have made categorical statements that a more engaged employee leads to better business results and anecdotally there is evidence that this is so – intuitively this would of course make sense. However, there is also evidence that there is little or no correlation whatsoever with business performance – a recent study by Henley Management College concluded that in their research in the corporate world, no such relationship exists.

We have also seen commentary relating to engagement that focuses on the notion of how to get that ‘extra discretionary effort’, i.e. to create employees that are willing to put in more work for altruistic reasons. We think that this focus on singularly attempting to get more out of people is both cynical and short-termist. Having said all this, a more productive, motivated, happy and ‘easier to get on with colleague’ is better than one who isn’t and engagement studies have sought to attempt to analyse and decode what makes this ‘better’ employee.

Consequently, employee engagement has developed into a complex and multi-dimensional concept that has gone much further than the simple notions of motivation, the psychological contract and employee satisfaction, yet it draws on elements of each of these ideas. It also has much in common with the extensively researched concepts of commitment and organisational citizenship behaviour (OCB). With these last two, there are some important differences – engagement is a two-way process: organisations engage people (intentionally or otherwise) through their systems and processes and they in turn choose the level of reciprocal engagement.

Do read our article in our last newsletter ‘Are your Talent Management Processes Fair?

http://www.head-light.co.uk/Articles/Fair_Talent_Management.pdf

So what does an engaged employee ‘look like’? From an HR perspective, the typical behaviours demonstrated by the engaged employee are:

• A belief in the organisation and its purpose
• A desire to work to make things better
• An understanding of business context and the ‘bigger picture’
• Being respectful of, and helpful to, colleagues
• A willingness to ‘go the extra mile’ , and
• Keeping up to date with developments in their field.

If only it was so straightforward that we could ask employees these questions directly and get reliable candid responses!

This is where Occupational Psychologists can add real value and develop (and validate) engagement-oriented behavioural indicators, not dissimilar from those used in 360 reviews. Subtlety and deftness can be achieved with careful wording that ask the important questions in the right way and a combination of positive and negative statements together with some discretion as who to ask for feedback, makes for an insightful diagnostic.

Ask us for some examples.

Appraisals - what do enployees think of them?

Why is the appraisal process a perennial problem in many organisations today? Despite best efforts, it either falls into disrepair or is undermined almost as soon as it’s introduced. Has it been noted how each year the process seems to have more paperwork and more to do? Employees and their managers struggle on with it but is there any real return on their investment in time and money? Is the Leadership Team (and HR) getting the information that they need to make decisions quickly in these turbulent times?

Let’s review a typical example of how the appraisal process is viewed.

It’s appraisal time again and line managers are not looking forward to having to spend the time completing the paper work and employees generally aren’t looking forward to the dreaded appraisal meeting itself. Unresolved issues that have been under the surface most of the year are going to be dragged out and documented and the usual unbearable ‘schmoosing’ upward to management will start if it hasn’t already behind closed doors. Everyone will get given a ‘rating’ or score that they don’t understand and by some 360 process that is shrouded in secrecy. Some say that the score is used for bonus; some say a bad score will put you ‘into the departure lounge’. It’s not good that John (a colleague) and I haven’t been seeing eye to eye lately and if he’s going to be giving me some sort of a score, he’ll put the knife in. Best I do too then. I’m not sure the forms we use really apply to my role and my Manager doesn’t really understand the realities of the job I do, so we end up with these circular or inconclusive discussions that inevitably require me to sign off on some vague actions we all know won’t happen. After all of this, it gets filed away and only used again if they want to stop me suing them if I get sacked or made redundant. The output of all of this seems pointless at best and everyone would rather not do it, but we have no choice on how, when and whether it’s done.

If it’s not working, why are we doing it like this? Discuss...