• Jacque Vilet

    Agree with you Jason.   And  . . the issue is not applicable just to employee engagement.  It also is the same issue with wellness programs, management development programs, best practices,etc.  We all know intuitively these programs are good —- but sense they cost money, the company needs to have proof that they are worth the money spent.   That’s the cold hard fact of business.

  • http://twitter.com/dkwtechnik Mr. Ketter

    I agree with this article fully. I have spent years making engagement a business process instead of an afterthought. Engagement should be a core part of any business strategy. If there is no or minimal employee buy in, you are almost sure to fail. The engagement ,however, should start at the point of on-boarding and permeate daily work activities. The #1 way to accomplish this is through your intranet or better yet a private social network. With {s}hareCLOUD work becomes play and play becomes profit. What I am  really talking about is Work 2.0. I mean it is 2012 and social isn’t going away not even in the workplace. Embrace it.

  • Leigh Branham

    Jason, I appreciate this post. Interesting thought about it being OK for different organizations to define employee engagement differently.  I’m not so sure about that.  I believe we should be able to agree on a universal definition.  The one I like best comes from The Conference Board “A
    heightened emotional and intellectual connection that an employee has for
    his/her job, organization, manager, or coworkers that, in turn, influences
    him/her to apply additional discretionary effort to his/her work.”  This definition encompasses three critical concepts: the emotional vs. intellectual distinction, the fact that the connection or bond can be to one or more facets, and the critical concept of discretionary effort.  I’d be open to hearing your perspective about what part of this definition an organization might have an issue with or what concept might be missing.  I also like the eight elements of Employee Engagement as set forth by Macey et. al in their book, Employee Engagement: Feeling elements: urgency, focus, intensity, enthusiasm; Behavioral elements: persistence, proactivity, role expansion, and adapting to change.  These are more than a definition–they are the earmarks–how we know it when we see it. I think more disagreement comes into play when we try to define the drivers of engagement and that is the crucial part where organizations may differ.  In our book, Re-Engage, Mark Hirschfeld and I identified 6 universal drivers based on our analysis of 2.1 million engagement surveys, but several other authors present different drivers based on different research. Totally agree about the need to tie engagement to the desired business result.