Bearing in mind that recently there have been major cutbacks from the government concerning the organization. According to the factsheet, (CIPD, 2014) employee ngagement have is becoming more and more popular in contemporary management practices over the last decade. The state of which is mostly intrinsic to the person psychologically speaking and physical. Commitment, job satisfaction and flow Of work are the key factors that are emphasized within employee engagement. It’s also partly to do with how much extra effort that a member of employee is willing to put into their work.
The key difference between traditional motivational train of thought is that whilst they are relatively individual based such as Maslow and Herzberg, which employee ngagement is more collective minded by comparison. In terms of the importance of employee engagement, Forbes have released an article concerning the importance of which. (Green, 2011)Within the article it has also mentioned that in fact engagement should happen during the process of strategizing the next move that the company wish to take.
It has also been said that clear communication regarding direction and plan forward is a vital part of engagement. Part of the reason is that not only does it increase their motivation but also by keeping them “in the loop”, it creates a sense of elonging at the same time. In doing so it is more likely that the staff would be more willing to take risks to ensure the success of the plans and visions that the organization is aiming at.
Order it from experienced writers now!
For Only $13.90/page $19.90
In fact during the recent recession, there are some that would also argue that good solid employee engagement would just save the company. An article released by The Guardian (Robertson, 2012)have gone further one to discuss that under these times of stress, it is vital for management to keep up positivity and morale of the workforce. This is also supported by an article that have been released by the BBC (BSC, 01 2) in which have described the lack of employee engagement is catastrophic to an organization where its’ progress can be impeded as a result.
A director of HR have been quoted saying ” People who are engaged are more likely to be productive and happier at work, want to develop their career here, contribute more ideas to the organization, and go above and beyond to do something special. This inevitably has knock-on effects on morale, our ability to retain people and ultimately our creativity as an organization. ” There have been many, many attempts at defining the process. Employee engagement is considered one of the harder concepts to but explained merely by words as stated within (Kular, et al. 2008) a research paper released by Kingston University Business School whom have worked closely in conjuncture with CIPD on the subject matter (CIPD, 2014). However the essence of which is to utilize the members of an organization to the greatest extent within their jobs. It also takes emphasis on the mentality and views of staff about their workplace, management and working conditions. Their views over the those three factors whether positive or negative will ither directly or indirectly affect the efficiency by some degree.
It is also further discussed in the article that engagement also translates the level of enthusiasm of the staff to get perform their assigned tasks. Another way of defining or quantifying employee engagement is the their level of commitment. Due to the numerous perception and understanding of the subject, it has thus been understood that, it is a challenging to truly define this. There have been studies done by (Insyncsurveys, n. d. ) that have shown that there is a correlation over proper implementation of employee ngagement.
The productivity of staff will very likely improve due to motivation other than personal ones. Their focus and motivation compared to those whom are in lesser contact with management are greater. The staff’s main source of motivation is no longer focused upon themselves but rather as an organization on a whole. In fact lowered engagement is said to have an adverse effect upon productivity. This is also supported by a number of sources (Gray, 2013) in which it has also mentioned within the article the more engaged management is, the productivity would also increase along with it.
Another impact that engaging in the practice is that, management can seek out and find talents or develop them in an organsational context thereby adding even more value to the company as a whole. In doing so , the member of staff can utilize their skills that they have developed and apply them when coming in contact with the customer base. One crucial benefit that employee engagement have is that it will decrease the level of attrition but to also stop competitors from absorbing staff members and or utilize their skills for their own means. As such the level of success can more accurately measured.
There are numerous advantages in employee engagement. A organization especially business entities relies heavily upon brand value and reputation of the business in order to carry them forward. The staff of the business are the frontline representative of the business. Well engaged employee would be more likely to translate to the employees being more willing to defend the reputation of the company. According to the CIPD fact sheet (CIPD, 2014) another advantage employee engagement brings is that the more upbeat and satisfied a member of staff is.
They would more likely feel more driven invest ore into the business, thereby resulting in a more heightened sense of belonging. As mentioned before employee engagement is also makes a point to take the mindset Of the employee from merely working towards a goal for themselves to becoming more “hive minded” in the sense where they’re working towards the goal for and with the others in mind. As mentioned before the intrinsic value of uniting the staff together in the interest of the “bigger picture” rather than an individual.
It is said that well executed employee engagement would also decrease the amount of staff turnover and ower staff absenteeism, both of which can prove to be critical when staff are not motivated in their job roles within an organization. This being said, the practice of employee engagement is not without their detractors and disadvantages at the same time. In fact an article released by Bloomberg (Herbert, 2009) have even gone as far as to say ” sound as though employees were disengaged… engagement programs treat the symptom not the disease…. . At which it also mentioned that employees are looking for good leadership with long term thinking. HR Weekly (Briner, 2014) have also eleased an article that have described it as a frivolous waste of time and resources. As it doesn’t have actual evidence to support their claims, the lack of clarity in which the concept is defined in the first place. The primary concern over all of this is the fact that despite the morale boost, employee engagement in some ways requires the management to “babysit” their employees in a manner of speaking.
It is argued that as members Of a team and the fact that it is a working environment this should not be tolerated in such sense. The very idea of employee engagement itself does lean towards n idealized situation, it works under the assumption that the current work situation can afford such a practice. Another disadvantage that have been addressed within a Forbes article is that, despite the fact that employee engagement is part of the process. Overly enthusiastic about the practice would prove to be quite harmful in the long run.
When employees make suggestions they should be accountable for those decision, as such this is training for them to take the challenge of adversity. The writer also illustrated the point that when engaging in the practice, not all employees voices can be heard practically speaking. Wakeman, 201 3) According to an article by Guardian (Allen, 2010), BT and Sainsbury have been one of the most attractive companies that have put employee engagement into their practice. The company have been collected feedback staff and pushed management to take them on board.
This resulted in managers receiving reports As of this year, each manager gets a report on their team’s aggregate reports, which they are also expected to work with the staff to get implemented within the past year. As a result they have been named as some of the top companies that the new young workforce are attracted towards. The article also claims that BT have successfully gained nearly 24,000 applies for their 221 apprenticeships. Coming to near 100 competitors per place. (Allen, 201 0)Sainsbury’s have been praised for taking on board recommendations generated from their staff.
At the time of the article, the company just recently received its’ 30,000 piece of staff feedback. The company itself was known at the time of the article to be within the top 30 employee engagement charts in terms of communication. In fact, the suggestions have been considered and taken onboard one of which included alcohol free red wine. Continued engagement with the frontline staff from management is encouraged. It has been said that management can gain a better insight of the needs and issues from the view of the trenches.
Though an issue with the reports that have been kept over these meetings are that it is not completely accurate. Despite these setbacks both Sainsbury and BT are both considered to be ideal companies to work for. (Truss, et al. , October 201 3)The logic behind it being staff members can find social identification and participation. The fact that the management have forged that relationship with them makes in some ways reaffirms their work. Their presence reinforces the feeling of belongingness and as such acts as a form of motivation for the staff.
That being said within the article in The Guardian, despite the benefits of employee engagement, it is said that even with “… well developed practices… ” (Allen, 201 0) no direct correlation in terms of smoothing relations between the trade union and management. This is understandable, despite the relationship between labor and management need not be hostile, both sides ultimately stand at a very opposite angle. 8T despite having the practices in place have only just avoided industrial action rom the Communications Workers union during an earlier time when the article was written.
A research done by the IPA (Involvement & Participation Association) have stated that there is a strong need to increase their funding for the organization in order for the staff to better fulfill their tasks. The article by CIPD (Lewis, 2014) further states that within their job roles, morale is highly linked with their performance. With high levels of employee engagement from the management, there are seven out of eight agencies whom have reported that staff absenteeism have seen a significant drop, as ell as leaving the organization altogether.
In fact if executed well, the mortality of patients takes a 2. 4% drop. The NHS have been known to be the receiving end massive cuts over the past few years due to the recession. That being said however, the organization have remained reasonably stable over the past few years, only having a small drop during the 201 1 period. The IPA report (Dromey, 2014) clearly states that they focus upon three key areas when measuring their success when quantifying the level of employee motivation and engagement.
Staff Advocacy, Involvement and motivation, hey each detail the different key areas in which it measures how well does the workforce feel psychologically; it also discusses the level of personal enthusiasm in which they can help the organization grow itself. It is also said that employee engagement need not to difficult. In fact it is compared to the some other forms of motivational methods to be somewhat more economical. Fortune 500 is a well known and internationally renowned business Magazines, their name carries similar weight to Forbes. In fact that each year they release a Fortune 500 company list and Forbes 100 rich list.
Both of which carries high prestige in the business world. An article within Fortune Magazine (Debow, 2011) have discussed that something as simple as some face-to-face contact with the employees or acknowledgement and appreciation would go a long way in forging a meaningful and beneficial relationship with the staff members in the long run. In conclusion, employee engagement one is quite innovative in its own way. For a start most if not all staff motivational schools of thought have always viewed staff members should be treated as individuals, that their needs and wants are enerally diverse.
The difference with employee engagement is quite the opposite, instead of looking to motivate the members of staff individually. The very essence of the concept is to unite them under one banner, whether it be a business entity or otherwise to work towards a common goal. It also puts a lot of emphasis on the on leadership rather than management of the employees. The philosophy behind this concept is that to truly push an organization or business forward is that their employees are their greatest assets. As with newer concepts that emerged in the latter part of the 20th entury, there are those who debated that it is not necessarily true.
For one there are some that would argue the fact that employee engagement IS not practical in fact it’s going to be in some ways over-complicate and impede the running of the organization as not all staff members would be qualified to make an opinion of the organization they work for. On one hand the advantage of employee engagement is that it would mean less staff-overturn and the possibility for the staff members to go above and beyond in order to help the business achieve the goals it is striving for, also it has been said that t can improve the position of the company within the industry itself.