[Beep Beep] The alarm on Bob’s smartphone was the reminder that in a few minutes his e-mentoring session with Lesley was due. Bob had just finished the e-mail he was composing so he sent it and then fired-up the Webex session. Lesley was already logged in and on line.
<Bob> Hi Lesley. What aspect of Improvement Science shall we talk about today? What is next on your map?
<Lesley> Hi Bob. Let me see. It looks like ‘Employee Engagement‘ is the one that we have explored least yet – and it links to lots of other things.
<Bob> OK. What would you say the average level of Employee Engagement is in your organisation at the moment? On a scale of zero to ten where zero is defined as ‘complete apathy’.
<Lesley> Good question. I see a wide range of engagement and I would say the average is about four out of ten. There are some very visible, fully-engaged, energetic, action-focused movers-and-shakers. There are many more nearer the apathy end of the spectrum. Most employees seem to turn up, do their jobs well enough to avoid being disciplined, and then go home.
<Bob> OK. And do you feel that is a problem?
<Lesley> You betcha! Improvement means change and change means action. Disengaged employees are a deadweight. They do not actively block change – they will go along with it if pushed – but they do not contribute to making it happen. And that creates a different problem. The movers-and-shakers get frustrated and eventually get tired trying to move the deadweight up hill and give up and then can become increasingly critical and then cynical. After they give up in despair they then actively block any new ideas saying – “Do not try you will fail.”
<Bob> So how would you describe the emotional state of those you describe as “disengaged”?
<Lesley> Miserable.
<Bob> And who is making them feel miserable?
<Lesley> That is another good question. They appear to be making themselves feel miserable. And it is not what is happening that triggers this emotion. It is what is not happening. Apathy seems to be self-sustaining.
<Bob> Can you explain in a bit more about what you mean by that and maybe share an example?
<Lesley> An example is easier. I have reflected on this a bit and I have used one of the 6M Design® techniques to help me understand it better. I used a Right-2-Left® map to compare a personal example of when I felt really motivated and delivered a significant and measurable improvement; with one where I felt miserable and no change happened.
<Bob> Excellent. What did you discover?
<Lesley> I discovered that there were four classes of difference between the two examples. And I then understood what you mean by ‘Acts and Errors of Omission and Commission’.
<Bob> OK. And which was the commonest of the four combinations in your example?
<Lesley> The Errors of Omission. And within just that group there were three different types that were most obvious.
<Bob> Can you list them for me?
<Lesley> For sure. The first is the miserableness I felt when what I was doing felt to me that it was irrelevant. When what I was being asked to do had no worthwhile purpose that I was aware of.
<Bob> So which was it? No worth or not being aware of the worth?
<Lesley>Me not being aware of the worth. I hoped it was of value to someone higher up the corporate food chain otherwise I would not have been asked to do it! But I was never sure. And that uncertainty generated some questions. What if what I am doing is of no worth to anyone? What if I am just wasting my lifetime doing it? That fearful thought left me feeling more miserable than motivated.
<Bob> OK. What was the second Error of Omission?
<Lesley> It is linked to the first one. I had no objective way of knowing if I was doing a worthwhile job. And the word objective is important. I am not asking for subjective feedback – there is too much expectation, variation, assumption, prejudgement and politics mixed up in opinions of what I achieve. I needed specific, objective and timely feedback. I associated my feeling of miserableness with not getting objective feedback that told me what I was doing was making a worthwhile difference to someone else. Anyone else!
<Bob> I thought that you get a lot of objective feedback on a whole raft of organisational performance metrics?
<Lesley> Oh yes! We do!! The problem is that it is high level, aggregated, anonymous, and delayed. To get a copy of a report that says as an organisation we did or did not meet last quarters arbitrary performance target for x, y or z usually generates a ‘So what? How does that relate to what I do?’ reaction. I need objective, specific and timely feedback about the effects of my work. Good or bad.
<Bob> OK. And Error of Omission Three?
<Lesley> This was the trickiest one to nail down. What it came down to was being treated as a process and not as a person. I felt anonymous. I was just a headcount, a number on a payroll ledger, an overhead cost. That feeling was actually the most demotivating of all.
<Bob> And did it require all Three Errors of Omission to be present for the ‘miserableness’ to become manifest?
<Lesley> Alas no! Any one of them was enough. The more of them at the same time the deeper the feeling of misery the less motivated I felt.
<Bob> Thank you for being so frank and open. So what have you ‘abstracted’ from your ‘reflection’?
<Lesley> That employee engagement requires that these Three Errors of Omission must be deliberately checked for and proactively addressed if discovered.
<Bob> And who would, could or should do this check-and-correct work?
<Lesley> H’mm. Another very god question. The employee could do it but it is difficult for them because a lot of the purpose-setting and feedback comes from outside their circle of control and from higher up. Approaching a line-manager with a list of their Errors of Omission will be too much of a challenge!
<Bob> So?
<Lesley> The manager should do it. They should ask themselves these questions. Only they can correct their own Errors of Omission. I doubt if that would happen spontaneously though! Humility seems a bit of a rare commodity.
<Bob> I agree. So what can the employee do to help their boss?
<Lesley> They could ask how they can be of most value to their boss and they could ask for objective and timely feedback on how well they are performing as an individual on those measures of worth. It sounds so simple and obvious when said out loud. So why does no one do it?
<Bob> A very good question. Some do and they are the often described as ‘motivating leaders’. So does this insight suggest to you any strategies for grasping the ‘Employee Engagement’ nettle without getting stung?
<Lesley> Yes indeed! I am already planning my next action. A chat with my line-manager about what I could do. Thanks Bob.
<Bob> My pleasure. And remember that the same principle works for everyone that we work directly with – especially those immediately ‘upstream’ and ‘downstream’ of us in our daily work.