Employee Engagement - Assignment Example

Running Head: EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT Employee Engagement Name Institution Date Introduction According to Beverly & Philip (2006), the concept of employee engagement is an essential aspect of human resource management practice. It is however vital to make clarifications concerning what the concept really entails. Various studies have been conducted to evaluate the concept of employee engagement in terms of its definition, how it can be measured and improved. The presentation aims at evaluating the concept of employee engagement in order to give a clarified meaning of what it entails for employees to be engaged. In addition the analysis will highlight some of the possible methods of Measuring and encouraging employee engagement. Lastly the various Hr strategies that can be adopted by Putteridge Solutions plc in order have an engaged workforce even at the phase of financial difficulty. Beverly( 2006) outlines that the term employee engagement was initiated by the Gallup Organization resulting from a 25 year survey and interview on managers and employees. The intention of the study was to develop a measurable work environment that could be utilized for comparison. From the Gallup research, employee engagement is related to the profitability, productivity and employee retention. The study indicated that happy employees are well equipped to handle the changes and stress that occur in the working environment. Companies should therefore focus on improving the wellbeing of the workforce in order to advance their productivity (Gallup Management Journal survey 2006). Different scholars have also evaluated the notion of employee engagement.Gerald and Dan (2008) give an evaluation of what employee engagement means through making reference to an engaged employee. The two scholars argue that an engaged employee is an individual who is enthusiastic and is involved fully in his or her occupation. They further highlight that an engaged employee cares about the future of the company they work with and are definitely ready to invest their efforts in order for the organization to attain more success. As a result Gerald and Dan (2008) propose that managers have to initiate strategies and trends that can enhance the development of engaged employees. This is because today many practitioners use the wide spread notion that employee engagement involves creating an environment whereby employees can have cognitive vigilance and emotional attachment (Beverly & Philip 2006). Archie & Ann (2004) link the definition of employee engagement to the existing development of job involvement. Peteraf (1993) notes that job development means the degree at which, the work context is fundamental to the person, and their identity. The two practitioners describe an employee who is fully engaged as one with attributes such as; Being emotionally and intellectually involved or bound to the organization An employee who can 100 percent in order to improve the organizations performance. One who goes beyond the basic responsibilities of the job in order to drive the organization forward One who has commitment to living by the values of the organization Douglas & Richard (2004) define employee engagement using the level of involvement and commitment that an employee has towards the organization. An employee who has characteristics of being engaged should be conscious of the context of the business and should work in harmony with other employees to improve the performance of the organization. Douglas & Richard (2004) also propose that the organization has to play a significant role nurturing and developing engagement, which is basically a two way relationship that transcends between the employer and the employee. Employee engagement acts as a barometer that verifies the association that an individual has with the organization he/she works in (Peteraf 1993). Remus (2004) attributes the concept of employee engagement to the term or concept of employee communication. Remus argues that employee engagement is emphasized by the practice of employee communication in order have a success organization. Therefore the organization should identify the employee as the most essential as opposed to any other variable in the organization. Remus (2004) further proposes that employee engagement should be undertaken by the management as a continuous learning process, measurement and improvement. From the analysis of the above practitioners, what is evident is that the concept of employee engagement is to some extents contentious, which makes it rather ambiguous. As highlighted above the discourse use d to define the concept are actually diverse depending on the scholar’s perspective. For instance Remus (2004) defines employee engagement as employee communication, while Archie & Ann (2004) link the concept to job involvement however all the definitions used by the various scholars come into consensus that employee engagement is driving force for the outcomes attained by the organization. Secondly the definitions transcend to the use of human resource strategies or initiatives in order to enhance employee engagement. As a result the management of the organization should cultivate employee engagement by enduring continued motivation and commitment of the workforce. According to Delaney & Huselid (1996), the research indicates that employee engagement results to a more productive workforce, more focused and ready to withstand challenges. As a result if the organization has such kind of employees the overall objectives of the organization will be attained therefore enhancing organizational effectiveness and performance. In addition the management will have less time in the supervision of employee that are effectively engaged. For instance a recent publication by the Applied Psychology Journal on meta- analysis concluded that employee engagement is linked to business outcomes that are meaningful at a magnitude that is vital to many organizations. However a compelling question derived from the analysis was that how much more fruitful is a workforce that is engaged as opposed to a non engaged employee? Various case studies brought the light concerning the practical significance of an employee who is engaged. For instance a survey on a Mortgage banking company indicated that account executives within a whole division who were disengaged dynamically produced 28% lesser revenue that their colleagues who were actively engaged. The analysis further outline that the engaged employee had a progressive belief that they can practically make a difference in the business; they seemed more confident and knowledgeable as opposed to the non engaged counterparts (Delaney & Huselid, 1996). How to Measure and Encourage employee Engagement The Gallup survey proposes that it is necessary to measure employee engagement at regular intervals so as to track its input to organizational success. However, measuring the level of engagement without making appropriate plans of how to make use of the results can lead to disengagement (Steve 2006). One of the proposed strategies by the research of measuring employee engagement is through administration of engagement survey such as the satisfaction surveys; which act as vital instruments of evaluating the level of engagement that the workforce are operating at. The central factor behind the satisfaction surveys is to actually pay close attention to various feed backs given by the employees. According to Svafa & Judith (2006), the satisfaction survey also act as diagnostic tools for solving the battles in the hearts of employees. Another strategy of measuring workforce engagement is through the evaluation as of employee’s level of productivity, customer loyalty and level of growth. The Gallup research highlighted several questions that can be used in the survey to estimate employee engagement such as Do you have knowledge of what is anticipated of you at work? Do your view points count at the work place? Are your fellow employees committed to their work? Does the management promote your development? Do you do what you do best? Do you have adequate equipments and materials for work? In terms of encouraging employee engagement, Williams (2000), states that it is sometimes challenging to make the workforce motivated and also additionally difficult to come up with strategies that can ensure that each staff member is fully engaged into the organizations culture. Psychological evaluations and employment studies indicate that employee’s engagement declines with the number of years that an employee continues to work in an organization and as they get older. A principle research undertaken by Gallup Organization also agrees to the fact that ensuring that employee engagement is maintained year after year is quite difficult. Any resolution to embark on increasing engagement should not be handled lightly when putting into consideration the fact that without difficulty it can be shattered. The outcome of the study indicated that the methods used to promote employee engagement vary depending on the kind of organization however the benefits package given to the employees also plays a significant role. The Gallup research came up with several findings on how to encourage employee engagement especially during the financial crisis. While partnering with some of the worlds success organizations, the Gallup research observed that focus of encouraging employee engagement was undertaken using various strategies. This include development whereby the organization makes priority through formulating a performance driven initiative and also putting emphasis on developing future leaders and mangers out of the existing employee (Curt, 2006). The Gallup studies further highlights that keeping employee engaged especially during situations of financial turmoil is dependant on the performance matrix of the organization. In despite of the fact that layoffs aren’t impending, employees are usually very much worried concerning the effects of the economy on their families and their savings. Therefore it is vital to encourage them by assisting them to create an emotional response that is positive towards their work. According to the research undertaken by Gallup employee engagement is highly dependant upon 12 human needs such as being recognized or identified for doing work that is good and feeling that you’re cared for. If all the twelve needs are effectively met then employees will continue to be fully engaged and even passionate about their work (Curt, 2006). Other strategies of encouraging employee engagement outlined by the study include telling the employees what the management anticipates to done; managers can regularly keep the workers on track through frequently communication their expectations. Secondly it is vital to make sure that the workforce has the right equipments and materials for work, so that they may not give excuses for not working as required. Another basic way of encouraging engagement in employees is by giving them a chance to do what they can do effectively or best, keep encouraging their development , recognize their efforts and letting them know that the management cares about them, this will create human connection that is an essential engagement requisite( Peteraf 1993). HR strategies to facilitate Employee engagement at Putteridge Solutions plc Putteridge Solutions plc has had a good track record of enhancing employee engagement through financial incentives not until the economic downturn which affected many organizations. In deed the organization used various useful strategies such as paying well, the staff were given team bonuses and annual bonuses. In addition the company provided technical updating for the employees through training making employee engagement in the organization effectively undertaken. With the decline of share prices and revenue it rather seems difficult to continue maintaining the same standards of employee engagement. Some of the significant HR strategies that can be used in to improve the engagement of employee using cost effective strategies during the phase of low period returns include; Objectives in terms of employee Relations The HR Strategies of employee relations basically aim at developing systems, policies and procedures which can maximize the extent at which employee and the management co-operate within a mutual benefit context and also reduce the effects and causes of restrictive practices and conflicts (Peteraf, 1993). Some of the strategies that can be adopted by Putteridge Solutions plc include; Enhancing mutuality At the moment Putteridge Solutions plc is not in the position of providing the financial incentives as it did earlier however the practice of enhancing mutuality in HR relations can be a useful solution to improving employee relations during the tough times being experienced by the company . David and Riccardo (2002) argue that the outcomes and practices of partnership are vital in improving employee relations. A survey undertaken on 54 employee and management representatives indicated that there is a great link that exists between ratings and practices of employee behaviour and attitudes in a situation whereby the model of mutual gains is applied. Many organizations have abandoned the practice of mutuality due to the fact that it may sometimes give rise to rebellion of the employee towards the management (William 2009). However in a situation whereby the organization cannot effectively meet the demands of the workforce in terms of financial gains, the mutuality interaction style can be rather useful. The practise of mutuality entails a relation that is reciprocal among independent entities. David & Riccardo (2002) argues that if the workforce are introduced to a culture of feeling that they have equal partnership to the organizations activities and culture the significant outcome is that the aspect accountability is going to be adopted by the workforce as a result they would become more engaged and work harder to improve the performance o f the organization. Mutuality tends to balance respect and power in order to promote a productive working environment. This particular interaction style that uses partnership can foster a lasting and positive outcome for organization (David & Riccardo 2002). Arrangements for Collective bargaining Collective barging is usually applicable between employers and union negations, however in the framework employee relations; collective bargaining involves giving the employees a chance to play an active responsibility of making positive changes in the organization. This basically implies that employees should be frequently involved in negotiation that pertain their welfare whereby they should be part of the decisions concerning the present working conditions and their current remuneration packages. Through developing an environment were interest of both parties (employers and employees) are recognized, I believe that the management and employee can attain a liable negotiated agreement that can serve the interest of every party (Remus, 2004)). Discussion of issues affecting the company and its employees William (2009) notes that Putteridge Solutions plc is undergoing financial challenges which have affected one of the essential elements of building a committed workforce; financial / remuneration motivation. It is vital for discussions to be organized between the management and employees concerning the current issues affecting the organization. In most cases decisions are usually made by the top management then circulars are channeled to the employee giving them reasons for the changes taking place in the organization, without providing a clear explanation concerning the real financial position of the organization. In Putteridge Solutions plc the aspect of employee relations has actually not been an essential priority, in most cases the main way of keeping the employees informed occasional meeting with the CEO of the company, the use of emails and team meetings. This gives explanation for the lack of commitment of the workforce which has recently been witnessed. The strategy to be adopted involves increasing employee relations in terms of frequent discussions concerning the present challenge facing the organization and what intended plans are underway in order to solve the problems. Communicating On Future Plans and Performance It is vital to involve the employees in strategic planning initiatives such as the organizations strategies in terms of making decisions and direction that the company is to take. Strategic planning involves determining were the organization is to go. The employees therefore must be part of such an analysis. This is because when making formal considerations concerning the future course of the organization certain questions must be asked and the employees should be liable to answering these particular questions , some of the questions include; 1. What action can be taken? 2. How can the action be taken? 3. Who will do it? 4. How long will it take? David & Ricardo (2002) argues that The course of action involves initiating an inspiring vision which can be communicated to the employees. The vision entails making the employees believe that we can make a difference only if they are committed to their work. It is also vital to make the employees envision the changes that will occur only if they endure the tough times that the organization is going through. (Kenneth 2009).Furthermore the vision should assist them change their attitudes from negativity to positivity. Lifting the spirits of the workforce towards believing in a better future can be a useful tool of unlocking the inner power as a result making them more emotionally committed and engaged towards attaining profitable future outcomes (Schneider, etal 2003). Setting corporate goals The goals of the organization are usually entrenched on the mission and vision statement of the organization. However it is vital to redefine the goals and missions of the organization depending on the context of situations of the life cycle of the business. Setting new goals with the employees can be a useful element (Jackson, 1989). For instance Putteridge Solutions plc can redefine its vision to; we will overcome. The set objective has to be realistic and specific in order for it to be translated to the activities of each member of the organization. Objectives in terms of rewards The department of business is greatly concerned about the financial incentives offered to the staff due to the decline in share prices and the revenue of the company. It is essential to use cost effective financial mechanisms that can be used in retaining high performing employees in a period of low returns. There are various strategies that can be used in attaining low cost rewards for employees. However it is essential to identify low cost and no cost rewards that can please employees and those that are meaningful (Williams & Geller 2000). Some of t he low cost creative incentives that can be utilized by the organization include; -Organizing long distance trips with entertainment and meals -Celebrating employee’s birthdays -Printing employees names on business cards to in order to recognize exemplary performance -Display the names of individuals who attain difficult tasks during weekly seminars -Parking space reservations for employees -Reserve a parking space for the Employee of the Month with a slot for the employee's name. -The divisions that are best performing should be given recognition basing on their performance during seminars and meetings -Annual celebrations should be held were certificates and gifts should be given to the best performing employees -Bonus packages should be offered on grounds of performance According to Douglas and Richard (2004), one of the essential virtues of low cost rewards or also no cost rewards is that they can frequently be undertaken. In most cases such rewards will definitely impress the workforce to having a feeling that they are worth being treated in a special manner and valued (Svafa & Judith 2006). If the company starts to experience an increase in its share prices and revenue the rewards can be advanced to allocating budgetary funds for child education and health care and various emergency incentives. The application of rewarding employee will however be beneficial to the organization if it is properly planned and executed (Delaney & Huselid 1996). Implementation of the Proposal The proposed solution can be executed through formulating a temporary action committee that will work towards ensuring that the proposed strategies work to solve the current phenomena. The above proposal does not actually require much of the company’s financial resources but rather the aspect time and commitment. In deed the financial part of incentives is usually vital in enhancing engagement for employees however there are instances where even with adequate financial rewards employees tend to not be fully committed to their work, therefore lowering productivity. As a result the utilization of human resource strategies that can enhance emotional and psychological commitment of the workforce can actually be a lasting solution for the organization. I believe that this particular proposal will change the direction of the company. Professionals in corporate and HR department have to rise up and strategically lead the workforce to be more associated with company. As a result, they have to erase ambiguity and adopt change in order for every employee to view tough times using a positive perspective. As highlighted by the proposal above some of the recommended best practices involve the management of human resource using positive initiatives such as accountability, leadership and transformation (David & Riccardo 2002). Conclusion Practitioners and academics have agreed on a wide spread notion that engaged employees are those that have emotional connection with the organizations they work in. The workforce is the center of any organizations performance therefore having effectively engaged employee will improve the productivity of any business. As a result the management of Putteridge Solutions plc should cultivate employee engagement by enduring continued motivation and commitment of the workforce. This will intern increase future productivity which will enhance continued financial motivation which is also a fundamental aspect of engaging the workforce. References Beverly, L & Philip L. (2006). Employee engagement: conceptual issues. Journal of Organizational Culture. 25(4) 34-78. Peteraf, M. (1993). Encouraging Employee Engagement. CMA Management. Douglas R & Richard L. (2004). The Psychological conditions of meaningfulness Safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 7, 11-37. Delaney, J. & Huselid, M (1996), “The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Perceptions of Organizational Performance,” Academy of Management Journal, 39 (4), 949-969. David, E & Riccardo P. (2002). Partnership at Work: Mutuality and the Balance of Advantage British Journal of Industrial Relations. Volume 39, Issue 2, pages 207–236, Jackson, S. etal. (1989). Organizational Characteristics as Predictors of Personnel Practices. Personnel Psychology, 42, 727-786.  Curt, C. (2006) .Is Your Company Bleeding Talent? How to become a true "employer of choice" The Gallup Management Journal Kenneth W. (2009). What Really Drives Employee Engagement. New York: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Kenneth W. (2009). Intrinsic Motivation at Work: What Really Drives Employee Engagement. New York: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Kanungo, G. (1982). Job involvement is a ‘Cognitive or belief. CMA Management. Peteraf, M. (1993). The Comerstones of Competitive Advantage: A Resource-Based View. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 170-191. Remus, I. (2004)).An experienced sampling measure of job satisfaction and its relationships with affectivity, mood at work, job beliefs and general job satisfaction . European Journal of work and organizational psychology. 13 (3), 367 – 389. Schneider, B, etal. (2003), “Which Comes First: Employee Attitudes or Organizational Financial and Market Performance?,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 88 (5), 836-851. Svafa G& Judith B (2006). Service leadership: the quest for competitive advantage. SAGE. Steve C. (2006). Getting Personal in the Workplace. Are negative relationships squelching productivity in your company? The Gallup Management Journal. 45 (5) 673-788. Williams, J& Geller, E .(2000). Behavior-based interventions for occupational safety: Critical impact of social comparison feedback, journal of Safety Research, 31,135-142. William H. (2009). Industrial and Organizational Psychology Practice Series. New York: Wiley and Sons. Wayne F. &, John W. (2008). Investing in people: financial impact of human resource initiatives. Sheffield: FT Press. Read More