• Kkacher

    What a great commentary on what organizations need to do! Well said!

    • Teresa Hopke

      Thanks Kathy!

  • JarrodThomas

    There is a reason Neil Diamond, despite being dissed by music critics, caricatured on SNL, and being the punchline of jokes for the too cool crowd, still sells out arenas, soccer stadiums (in South Africa) and other concert venues all over the world 46 years after his first hit.  Fan Loyalty.  And fans are fickle!  You are so right that he earned this loyalty through his live performances.  And, I might add, his humble attitude.  He is not only a gifted singer-songwriter but a brilliant businessman and, evidently, a dream boss.  (Most of his band has been with him for over 30 years – how rare is that in the music industry!)

    Anyway, great analogy to employee engagement.

    • Teresa Hopke

      Thanks Jarrod.  I didn’t know the part about Neil’s band being with him for over 30 years – that’s pretty amazing in any company, but especially so in the music industry!

  • Kens

    Well said is right! This is a great article.  Looking at a successful icon such as Diamond is a great way to see how to do it “right.”  I have to say, though, that I believe recruitment and engagement go hand in hand.  It is difficult and a waste of resources to work on engaging the wrong employees.  The goal of recruitment is to find the right person for the job.  If hiring managers invest the time to create a realistic and accurate job description, recruiters can find the best possible person for the position.  THEN the company can focus on working with that person to keep them engaged and passionate about what they do. Recruiting and engagement go hand and hand.  Often times a lack of engagement is due to job dissatisfaction which is the result of people taking a job that turned out to be very different from what they signed up for.  No amount of engagement will solve the problems created when the wrong person is hired for the job.
    Ken Schmitt
    http://www.turningpointsearch.net

    • Teresa Hopke

      Thanks Ken!  And just to clarify……I completely agree with you that recruiting is a crticially important investment an organization should make and that it should work hand in hand with engagment.  I just think that there is typically a disproportionate emphasis on recruiting in most organizations and a surprising lack of focus and investment on engagement.  It seems like a lot of organizations think that if they just invest in recruiting the right candidate then they can check the box and move on.  Organizations who get it know that they have to invest in getting the right candidates in the door in the first place AND that they have to keep investing to keep those candidates engaged once they are in the door. 

  • http://twitter.com/MrPeterQuintana Peter Quintana

    I am not at all offended by your comments. It is about time people stood up and challenged the managers and leaders of all companies to take engagement seriously, to take their employees seriously.

    It is not easy, but it also doesn’t have to be expensive and, as you say, evidence to support the rewards are well documented. It seems to me not that CEOs and Boards do not know what engagement is, but that they are too lazy to be bothered to make the effort.

    • Teresa Hopke

      Thanks for your comments Peter.  I agree with you that education about what engagement is isn’t the issue for leaders – finding the energy and commitment to take action is.  And to your point, the more we can challenge our managers and leaders and help them see how taking action can improve their business results, the better our businesses will be.

  • Heather Nelson

    These are great suggestions, and are not offensive at all 😉 Thanks for the post.

    • Teresa Hopke

      Thanks Heather!

  • Gtmclennan

    Engagement is the rage now in leadership research. We read of values, motivation, communication, trust, and we work virtual, online, and other places, and some must work within walls. What we are really getting to is perhaps, can leaders trust competent people to work well when left to determine how, when, where and what to work on. What was the 70’s jargon, “I’m OK, your OK”?  Authority has its place but likely less so as we manifest a virtual workforce. Can you trust? 

  • Chuckljones71

    Looking a Linkedin profiles show that changing jobs every two – three years is common.  Do you think this is a result of poor employee engagement or a side effect of the new social media age?

  • chica

    Thanks for the above article. You are quite right that some employers spend a lot of resources on recruiting people they consider to be the most talented and so on. Interestingly as they strive to do this, they seem to forget to raise their standards on engagement with the candidates they employ. For this reason, employees end up being disappointed with their places of work, because their initial contact with the organisations(or regarding information about them) was sprinkled with a lot of hype. In other words, the expectations of these employees get dashed as what they end up experiencing or witnessing, do not fit with what they were told initially.

    A lot of these organisations are mainly interested in setting unrealistic targets; they also tend not to be empathic enough with regards to certain employee issues and bias(in different forms) is rife. The effect of such situations, is that some work places become ‘battle grounds’. It could be quite challenging, as many workers spend a large proportion of the hours of a day, at work. This then tends to impact on other aspects of society such as the home, as well.