Employee Engagement at Train Operating Company - Assignment Example

Running Header: Employee engagement at Train Operating Company Student’s Name: Instructor’s Name: Course Code Date of Submission: Employee engagement at Train Operating Company Question 1 Write a report (for TOC senior managers) which highlights the survey’s most important findings for employee engagement. Justify your selection of the data chosen, and back this up with reference to relevant literature and company examples. The most important findings for employee engagement show that purpose drives employee commitment. Macey (2008) describes that employee engagement brings about clear business benefits. It also enables businesses to advance and brings real competitive advantage. However, it is difficult to maintain employee engagement as it takes time, effort, commitment and investment. Employee engagement involves various concepts that employees should posses in order to perform their duties effectively. Some of these factors include having a belief in the organisation and the desire to work and make things better. Employees should also understand the business context and have a bigger picture rather than concentration on less important factors. Employees are also said to be engaged once they are respectful of and helpful of their managers and colleagues. According to Robinson et al. (2004) employees should have the willingness to work extra hard through motivation and provision of good working conditions. Employees are also engaged in business activities by keeping up to date with the developments around their working environment. Organisations should therefore work and be committed to engage employees. Engagement is also seen as a positive attitude that employees hold towards the organisation and the values offered to them. An engaged employees is well aware of business context and works effectively with the rest of his colleagues in order to improve performance and to benefit the organisation. It is therefore necessary for organisation to nurture and shape engagement which is a two-way relationship between employees and the employer. In regard to the TOC Company, employee engagement was measured using both qualitative and quantitative elements and involving three focus groups which include London Terminus, Depot and Airport station. According to the case study, there were both positive responses and negative responses where some employees felt that the organisation is not fully committed to improving the situation. The general question asking employees how satisfied they are with their job showed that more workers at the Depot are very dissatisfied as compared to those in the Airport station. The workers say that the company is generally good but are frustrated for not being in a position to offer customers the best service due to lack of communication (Scarlett 2010). Employees here therefore need further training in order to be capable of communicating well with their customers. When asked about how motivated they feel in performing their job, the employees at the Depot are also very de-motivated as compared to those in the Airport station and London Terminus. Only 4 percent of the employees working at the Depot say they are very motivated and 43 percent are fairly motivated. This indicates that workers at the Depot have a negative attitude towards the organisation and have no belief in the organisation’s products and services. Smithson and Lewis (2000) the organisation does not enable the employees to perform well for example if there is no provision of training and development and the workers have no pride in providing quality service. The lowest level of satisfaction was also expressed in respect to the organisation caring for its staff and giving them a chance to develop their skills. The workers also expressed that they are rarely kept sufficiently informed for example when asked whether the changes in business are clearly communicated, more workers at the London Terminus disagreed strongly followed by those at the Depot and at the Airport station only 1 percent disagreed strongly. This showed that workers at the Airport station are provided with better working conditions as compared to those in other stations of the organisation. There was also a lower level of satisfaction as the workers are not praised when it deserves and the workplace environment is also not satisfactory. There is less opportunity for self development and no opportunity for career development and promotion. Workers do not also feel the support from the Human resource department and therefore are not able to express their dissatisfaction. The workers also express not being valued member of a team and fewer workers at the Depot and London Terminus expressed that the organisation is a place that cares for its staff. Fewer workers also expressed being given a chance to develop their skills and are also not sufficiently informed about the developments in the organisation. Fewer workers at the Depot expressed having job security and having the right equipment and resources to perform their job effectively. Both workers at the Depot and London terminus expressed not being praised for their good performance and that the organisation is not a good workplace environment. Workers expressed that the workplace environment is very backward due to underinvestment and this shows that the organisation concentrates in developing some parts such as at the Airport station therefore ignoring the Deport and the London terminus. Workers expressed that their uniform is not fit for its purpose and that it is shabby, uncomfortable and impossible to replace. Fewer workers at the London terminus expressed being respected by management as compared to other stations while those at the Depot have less contact with members of the public. As compared to workers at the Airport station and London terminus, those at the Depot expressed having less support from the Human resource department. In regard to health and safety, workers say that there is not time for health and safety training for example they expressed that faults being reported are not acted upon. Workers are also less motivated due to lack of recognition and praise once they do something well. Scarlett (2010) shows workers express that all they hear about are complaints and that the company does not reward initiative. This shows that managers are not trained effectively to deal with poor performance as workers say that the company does not deal fairly with non-attendance. There is also unfairness in the way people are treated and in appointment of staff. This is because some workers said that some of their colleagues are unqualified for their role. Employers should therefore employ psychological contract by caring about the feelings of their employees and ensure balance. Conway and Briner (2000) describes that psychological contract incorporates beliefs, values, expectations and aspirations of the employer and the employees. This implies fairness and having good faith. The contract should be formed during the recruitment process where both parties discuss what they can offer in the prospective relationship. This develops employment relationship where employment rights and duties emerge through the interpersonal relationships that are formed in the workplace. Discretionary efforts involve working hard, showing extra effort, solving problems, taking ownership and contributing brighter ideas to the improvement of the organisation. For this to be achieved various aspects should be maintained such as public relations, internal communications and strategic planning. In today’s competitive world, organisations success and failure is determined by employee productivity and performance as their ability and willingness to be creative and innovative is significant. This is because employees have a choice to give the organisation their best or give something less (Cullinane and Dundon 2006, pp. 113-129). This is the employee discretionary effort which depends on choice and to change this attitude, employee should be motivated using various factors which include training and career development. They are also motivated through pay and benefits, good communication, performance appraisal and maintenance of good health and safety. These factors make employees feel valued and involved in all activities of the organisation therefore leading to employee engagement. Question 2 Produce a set of action points for HR aimed at securing higher levels of employee engagement. In order to secure a higher level of employee engagement, Human Resource Managers should ensure that they effectively support their employees in various ways. These ways include involving employees in decision making in a way that the employees feel that they are able to voice their ideas. Schneider and Smith (2003) explain that managers should also listen to their views and value their contributions. The HR department should also ensure that employees are given an opportunity of developing their skills for example through the introduction of training and development programs. Employees’ health and safety should be maintained so that they feel cared for and for them to consider the workplace environment as a good place to work. According to Westwood et al. (2001, pp. 621-651) employees should also be developed and motivated in order for them to enjoy their job. Some of the concepts used in developing people and rewarding them include the use of Theory X which states that people normally do not like to work and therefore have to be controlled and coerced for example through material rewards. Motivation is therefore said to be a function of external reinforcements. Various systems of motivation have been implemented such as systems to promote teamwork, use of participative management and responsive methods of supervision. Managers have also put more emphasis on continuous improvement. Employee development involves promoting cooperation without necessarily using rewards though competitive rewards may be used in quality management. To create ways of motivating employees, it is necessary to first to analyse the nature of the organisation. This is because rewards do not enhance performance in all tasks for example those that need creativity. Extrinsic motivators therefore do not work in workplaces and it shows that the problem is that they are presented as incentives (McKay et al. 2008, 349-374). Human resource department should also impose good working conditions for all workers to facilitate employee development. The remuneration system should be fair to all as well as the grading system. A performance management framework should be set up in order to ensure that the employees work according to the purpose of the organisation. Some of the experiences involved include experimental classroom programs, executive coaching, mentoring etc. May and Mumby (2005) puts it that the process also involves setting of goals and evaluating whether one has achieved them after a given period of time. The right training should be given to workers in order to enhance self efficacy. Workers should also be formulated in a way that they are able to have a clear image regarding the desired organisational position. This will facilitate development of capabilities as well as hard work. These concepts if collaborated bring about various characteristics in workers such as being responsible, goal focused, having a purpose in life and being able to act immediately. Taking up challenging job assignments is also another way of development. HR should also implement performance appraisal systems where they are able to keep the employees informed about the things that affect them. Seijts and Dan (2006) describe that performance appraisal systems are meant for evaluating employee performance basing on the present standards of the organisation. The mean reason of carrying out appraisals is to enable managers to effectively analyse the company’s human resources. If the process is well done, it serves the purpose of enabling employees improve their performance in order to achieve organisations stated objectives. The appraisals also set goals for employees whereby employees aim at achieving a particular level of standard according to the vision of the firm. Appraisals also help the organisational managers assess their workers effectiveness. According to Harter et al. (2002, pp. 269-274) the managers are able to make decisions regarding various processes of the firm such as promotions, demotions, training, compensation, job transfers and terminations. Poor performance is a subject that worries many managers and employees at the same time. This is a major concern to managers since it shows how effectively the organisation is being managed. Poor performance should therefore be tackled in the right manner sensitive issue that may affect the performance of the entire organisation. Poor performance should be addressed since it reduces productivity this low output. Sanchez and Levine (2009) explains that though some managers feel uncomfortable raising the agenda and end up ignoring it, tackling poor performance is a necessity to every business. The process however has a negative effect on employee motivation and retention. Poor performance involves various employee behaviours that do not contribute to achieving organisational goals. These include absenteeism, lateness, attitude or laziness. According to Cheney et al. (2004) communication is also necessary and especially two- way communication which involves give and take and therefore employees are able to get enough feedback about their performance. Communication also necessary in an organisation as it enables workers to know about their roles and responsibilities and it also promotes effective development. Effective communication enables managers inform workers about changes in the organisation and make them aware of their competitors. Communication also helps managers to implement policies and guidelines from top management to lower levels. Two-way communication is more accurate to use in this organisation as the managers talks and listens to the views of the employees therefore coming up with an effective agreement. HR should also implement effective internal co-operation among workers and develop a focus. Cromwell and Kolb (2004, pp. 71-80) shows they should also be committed to employee wellbeing as this will make employees feel valued. This will be achieved through implementation of clear, accessible HR policies and practices. Though the implementation of these practices looks easy, it also needs much effort and continuous investment. This ensures that all the basics are put in place and that they are working effectively. Embarking on a drive to increase employee engagement and psychological contract should therefore not be undertaken lightly since it can easily be shattered and cause problems to the entire organisation. References Cheney, G, Christensen, L, Zorn, T & Ganesh, S 2004, Organisational communication in an age of globalization, Issues, reflections, practices, Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press. Conway, N & Briner, B 2000, Understanding psychological contracts at work, A Critical Evaluation of Theory and Research. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Cromwell, S & Kolb, J 2004, An examination of work-environment support factors affecting transfer of supervisory skills training to the work place, Human Resource Development Quarterly, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 71- 449. Cullinane, N & Dundon, T 2006, The psychological contract: a critical review, International Journal of Management Reviews, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 113–129. Harter, K, Schmidt, L & Theodore L 2002, Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes, A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 87, no. 2, pp. 268-279. Macey, S 2008, The meaning of employee engagement, Industrial Organizational Psychology. May, S & Mumby, K 2005, Engaging organisational communication theory and research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. McKay, Avery & Morris 2008, Mean racial and ethnic differences in sales performance, The moderating role of diversity climate, Personnel Psychology, vol. 61, pp. 349-374. Robinson, D, Perryman, S & Hayday, S 2004, The drivers of employee engagement, Institute for Employment Studies.  Sanchez, J & Levine, E 2009, What is (or should be) the difference between competency modeling and traditional job analysis? Human Resource Management Review, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 53–63. Scarlett, K 2010, Quality employee engagement measurement, The New HR Analytics, pp.108-122. Schneider, H & Smith 2003, Which comes first, Employee attitudes or organisational financial and market performance? Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 20-34. Seijts, H & Dan, C 2006, The ten C's of employee engagement. Ivey Business Journal. Smithson, J & Lewis, S 2000, Is job insecurity changing the psychological contract? Young people's expectations of work, Personnel Review, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 680-702. Westwood, R Sparrow, P & Leung, A 2001, Challenges to the psychological contract in Hong Kong, International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 12, no.4, pp. 621-651. Read More