Have you ever doubted your CEO's true commitment to your employee engagement program? Maybe she rubber stamped an engagement survey merely to appease HR. Or maybe he quietly thinks employee engagement is a utopian state that isn't realistic or actionable. If thats your CEO, ask if he wants more creativity in the workplace.
There is no clearer evidence of an employee's engagement than the level of creativity exerted. Creativity by its very nature is discretionary effort. It is impossible to coerce creative action. Neuroscience teaches us that creativity happens most in the absence of distraction. And managerial pressure is a distraction. That's why so many of our best ideas come in the shower, on a jog, or on a flight.
Engagement comes first. Engagement is not just about a score or a set of favor bar charts. Engagement is the precursor to behavior that drives innovation. It precedes creativity.
We have a leader on our operations team that scored a huge win last year when he developed an automated quality assurance tool for his team to use internally. For the sake of example, let's call him Brian Schoenecker. In a leadership meeting, I recognized Brian for his game-changing work innovating our QA process. After an "ah shucks" display of humillity, Brian said, "actually I was acting selfishly."
He explained that solving a nagging problem motivated him to figure out a better way. He came up with an idea; hacked the code; and put it into production without lay-on-the-floor ideation, meetings, or other nonsense.
He called it selfish because he knew it would make his work faster and smarter. Training his team would be easier. And he made it his dominant priority for two weeks despite other people's pull on his time.
But that's how innovation works. And it always starts with an employee that cares enough to push through the inertia of the current state. When managers make employee engagement a priority, this is the behavior they come to love and expect.
Businesses thrive on that brand of selfishness. To get more of it, you have to know what drives engagement at your company.
Be selfish.
On March 14th, Greg Smith resigned his leadership post at Goldman Sachs and published a letter to the New York Times incriminating his former employer for perpetuating a virtueless culture where profit trumps client interests. A few days later, Omaha businessman Doug Wilwerding wrote the following response to Smith's letter. We post Wilwerding's letter with permission because his commentary represents the core mission of Quantum Workplace--to help companies make awesome workplaces.
Since I sold my company to West Corporation in 2007 I have come to better understand and embrace my passion that I have had since joining the workforce 26 years ago; creating humane, meaningful, purposeful, soulful, and successful workplaces. I am inspired by great leaders who create great cultures that enable people to reach levels of contribution, demonstrations of capability, and a soul enriching return from their work. Such work places are the alchemy of great vision, a strident culture of performance, unrelenting passion for the well being of all people in contact with the business, a commitment to putting the best product or service in the market, and building a brand to be proud of, both internal and external to the company. I know it is possible. I was blessed to be part of it and live it at Omnium. And I have seen it in so many surprising places over the past 5 years.
And more importantly I know that following this recipe leads to incredible profit. It is really pretty simple; enthusiastic, engaged, loved employees make great product. Great product makes loyal customers. Loyal customers result in sustained profits.
And I have seen the polar opposite. Cultures where employees are a disposable commodity. Where capacity and ability are muted. Where the welfare of the human being is of no concern to the powers that be. All that matters is quarterly earnings and the C-level bonus and stock comp. Period.
Greg Smith describes such a place in Goldman Sachs. He could be describing thousands of companies. He could be describing companies mere miles from where I sit in Omaha. He could be describing companies with which I have been affiliated.
As cynical as this sounds my biggest surprise as I read the ongoing stream of commentary on Mr. Smith’s letter was that people were “surprised”. I have had the chance to work with Goldman Sachs on a few deals. I was hounded by their sales team when I sold my company. The bottom line is that everything Mr. Smith says was always right out in the open. The arrogance, the greed, the disposability of clients, the sheer sense of entitlement to be at the table and calling the shots was unabashedly on display. The premise was if you were playing with Goldman Sachs you were a big boy and the rules were big boy rules. But the reality that becomes apparent when you work with them is that no matter how good you are, you will never be playing on a level playing field. In the business food chain, you are food.
Unfortunately, most consumers of investment services and investment banking services, even wealthy consumers, are intellectually lazy and hence ultimately lemmings. They will follow the trend and hence continue to invest with Goldman (and the like) being sold “oranges where the juice has been removed long ago”.
The revolution against cultures such as Goldman’s and companies near and far that sacrifice people for profits will come from the best and brightest minds who consciously decide to remove themselves from the ranks of available employees and instead work for [or start and run] firms that have souls and values and principals, and a purpose beyond their own near term reimbursement. Of course this is the true test of principals--putting them above short term gains. Is the employee who participates in the toxic culture rationalizing the pay as a valid reason any less to blame than the company that perpetuates the culture? Perhaps not.
This is the irony; the power does lie with the “Occupy Wall Street” crowd, but not in the way they think. They need to quit protesting with their mouths and begin protesting with their talent, taking it where it creates real value in a way we can all be proud of and can build on. Goldman Sachs and the like will be brought to heel when they can no longer fill their ranks with willing accessory to the behavior they perpetrate.
Companies that fail to value the dignity of work and the relevance of not only paying people but helping them to realize their potential as people, not just employees should be starved of talent. This is a supply side problem. We are the supply. We control the perpetuation of the cultures that are toxic. Do we have the courage to think and act differently about how we allow our talents to be utilized? Or do we rationalize and compromise and hence enable the slow erosion of our pride, our culture and our principals.
We all know a company just like the one Mr. Smith describes in Goldman. What are we doing to extricate our affiliation and move it to where it rewards those things we say we believe in and value?
--Doug Wilwerding
In “Five Rules for Fostering Motivation at Work” I put forth a basic framework for fostering a motivating organizational culture. The cornerstone of any motivating culture is a compelling purpose underlying that organization’s existence. Clarity of purpose creates shared identity across a company. Many leaders can effectively articulate the "what" and the "how" of their business. But far fewer communicate the "why." This article outlines four essential elements of a compelling purpose statement useful to managers in communicating purpose at any level of the organization.
Essential Element #1: A Compelling Purpose Statement is Authentic
The purpose statement should be based on the true values of the organization’s leadership. Leaders throughout the organization must be willing to role model the purpose of the organization for their followers. Leaders do this through the decisions they make and the behaviors they reward. When leaders behave in a way that is contradictory to the purpose statement, the statement will be viewed as disingenuous and lose its motivational power. Put simply, if you aren’t willing to live it, don’t state it.
Essential Element #2: A Compelling Purpose Statement is Action Oriented
A purpose statement should tell the organization’s people what to work toward. The purpose should be the basis for goal setting and decision making. When a purpose does not dictate action it will fail to guide people’s behavior. This may mean that a manager will need to adapt or translate the organization’s purpose so that it clearly dictates action for their work team.
Essential Element #3: A Compelling Purpose is Meaningful
A purpose statement should provide meaning for the work of the organization. The purpose statement should attract those who the organization seeks to hire and motivate those it asks to execute its strategy. When people find meaning in their work they are more likely to be motivated, committed, and satisfied. The purpose statement should answer the “Why” question for people.
Essential Element #4: A Compelling Purpose Statement is Clear
Vague doesn’t motivate! For the purpose to be motivational it must be clearly understood by the people of the organization. It should be simply stated and brief. It should highlight only that which is core to the organization and avoid focusing on secondary issues. When the purpose is clear to people they are more likely to understand how they can contribute.
A purpose or mission statement that I believe meets these criteria is:
“Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful.”
This statement clearly states why Google exists and what it seeks to do, is meaningful, and thus, motivational to the type of person Google seeks to employ, and based on this outsider’s perspective is role modeled by the leaders of the organization. It is not surprising that many of Google’s breakthroughs toward the execution of this purpose come from the ideas and efforts of their people rather than through organizational initiatives.
Other notable purpose statements include:
“Democratize the automobile.” -Ford in the early 1900s
“Our vision is to be earth’s most customer centric company; to build a place where people can come to find and discover anything they might want to buy online.” -Amazon.com
“To reinvent the future.” -Apple
In this week's installment of Top Survey Comments, we're focused on the CEO. Here are actual, unedited comments submitted in employee engagement surveys. Each comment is from someone that couldn't stop talking about their CEO.
- We have a great CEO and executive team and they have taken this company in the right direction especially in today's economy and world market issues. They have made excellent decisions in mergers and aquisitions and growth for this company.
- I have worked for more than one organization in this same field and this company is by far the best. I can't say enough good things about this company. I am the lowest tier type of employee and I've had lunch and/or meetings with the CEO five times in the past year due to both my achievements and his desire to communicate with all levels of employees.
- I personally feel that ****** has chaged my life. I have never worked for an organization that care so much about their employee's and actually show it and just don't talk about it.
- It was on the very first day of employee orientation that I realized I was a part of an extraordinary organization. First-day employees were assembled in the executive boardroom and personally visited by all members of the executive team including the President and CEO.
- The CEO makes himself available to the employees for Q&A monthly, the company rewards employees for meaningful contributions, and maintains regular updates on important company initiatives.
- Our CEO has reinforced the message that we need to take time to enjoy friends and family and have work/life balance.
- It would be nice to have CEO's stay longer than one or two years.
- Lo que si veo muy mal es que el dueno o CEO nunca se le ve por ningun lado.
- Need the CEO to take off Rose Colored Glases!!so to speak.
- [But I can't help but throw one funny one in]...As we grow, we are less of a family and distances are created amongst us. Sometimes not a goos feeling (I interpretted "goos" as a verb rather than a misspelling)
No matter the size of the company, access to the CEO matters for employee engagement. In almost all instances, "trust" in senior leadership has more to do with access and visibility of senior leadership than it does trust or integrity. Prod your CEO to become the Chief Encourage Officer and your employee engagement will benefit.
Outplacement firm Challenger Gray says employees will eat up $175 million of time filling out brackets and watching basketball during work hours in the coming weeks. Their press release shows a light-hearted attempt to calculate the financial impact of US employees being glued to the NCAA basketball tourney.
March Madness is a time honored tradition and part of our culture as a country. Employers should rally around this opportunity and use it to allow organic relationships to thrive.
When it comes to team building, a company bracket beats a Trust Fall every time. What other activity affords you universal participation without incentives or eye-rolling?
Leaders: don't give your sales team the evil eye when you see them huddled over a laptop streaming a game. In fact, call Jimmy Johns and get those salespeople some grub.
Remember, productivity is not a function of time. Productivity is an outcome of employee engagement. And engagement is strongly impacted by relationships. Time spent building relationships is a great investment.
The fact that Challenger Gray's March Madness report is widely distributed each year is evidence that we still have an industrial age mindset about work. Too many people still see work as merely showing up--where the employer buys the time of the employee. Time is an input. But it's one of many. And the relationship between time and effectiveness is spurious at best.
Now excuse me while I decide if I'm going to keep Syracuse in my Final Four.
Young Professionals. Emerging Leaders. High Potentials. Creatives. Millenials. Gen Y. We have lots of titles for the youngest demographic in the workplace. Some titles reference age. Some fragment them into groups according to performance. Some assign generalizations about the group’s interests and behaviors.
One thing is for sure: everyone’s talking about them. I attended two conferences this week—one was organized by and for young professionals. And the rhetoric of seismic generational change reminds me of the larger-than-life perception Scottish soldiers had of William Wallace whose reputation became a caricature.
- Marketers are targeting them because of the volume of their social voices.
- Employers want to hire them because they’re agile and ambitious.
- Cities want to keep them because their thrift store fashion and Ray Bans ooze “cool”. And cool is the new smart.
Inasmuch as we admire Gen Y, we also fear them. HR departments worry that Gen Y’s addiction to social media exposes too much risk. Risk of lost productivity. Risk of PR disasters. And managers are overwhelmed at the thought of retaining such a mobile group.
Here’s the good news: today’s 22 – 32 year olds aren’t as different as their legend purports. Gen Y may look different than Gen X today—but much more similar to Gen X when they were entering the workplace.
Experience is (and always has been) an asset AND a liability. One edge young people have always had in the workplace is their propensity towards action. Youth don’t know what they don’t know. And that naiveté allows them to keep moving forward rather than being focused on obstacles. Meanwhile, the experienced crowd—with language and posture that can be mistaken for wisdom—too often chime in with “but…” or “on the other hand…”. The older generations have more income and ego at risk—and are more likely to obsess over the obstacles.
If Gen Y has a genius distinct from past generations entering the workplace, it’s their preference for influence rather than power. The Greatest Generation, Boomers, Gen Xers…emerged as leaders in companies, communities, and charities by climbing ladders. They studied. They worked hard. They learned from mistakes. And that progress earned them power in the form of positional authority.
Gen Yers have a different approach to leadership. They would rather educate you towards a particular path—rather than tell someone how to act. They are motivated by change. They may be the most effective makers of movements in modern history.
Skeptical? Look at Wikipedia. It’s comprised of 3.5 million articles written in 250 languages. Only one-tenth of one percent of viewers has ever contributed to the encyclopedia. The average age of those contributors is 25.
Or look at Wael Ghonim. He was the 30 year old Google employee in Egypt who curated a Facebook page that mobilized a movement of young Egyptians and led to regime change.
This generation of leadership eschews hierarchy. Their networks are large networks of weak connections—whereas preceding generations relied more on small groups of tight followers. They assemble and disband based on cause. And they build fewer and less formal organizational structures than leaders of other generations. They behave as starfish, not spiders.
Performance management is both a leadership buzzword and a soilbed for upcoming change. Most people start a new job motivated to perform, but many lose motivation only a short time into their new role. So the question for any organization is, “How do we foster motivation in our people?” Each manager must be involved in answering this question and shaping a culture that fosters motivation. What follows is a basic framework for shaping a culture that fosters peoples’ motivation at work.
Rule #1: Foster a Purpose Driven Culture
An inspiring and clearly stated purpose is the cornerstone of any motivated organization. Shared purpose enables community ownership of the work of the organization through an organizational mindset or culture. Does your organization have a clearly stated purpose? Does your team? Do you? The purpose should be short and simple so that everyone can learn it, understand it, and internalize it.
Rule #2: Foster a Fit Culture
Once the organization has a clearly stated purpose it can staff, evaluate, and reward to instill or reinforce an organizational culture that will guide behavior. All people decisions should be made with fit with purpose in mind. Do your people’s skills, values, goals, and personality fit with the goal of achieving your organization’s purpose?
Rule #3: Foster a Goal Attainment Culture
The inspiring purpose should drive the goals that are set in the organization. Employee motivation is much more likely when people believe that their goals have meaning to the organization, that they will be meaningfully rewarded for goal attainment, and that they are capable of achieving their goals. Do people in your organization believe these things?
Rule #4: Foster a Trust Driven Culture
Are relationships in your organization or work team built on mutual trust? When relationships are built on trust managers are more likely to empower their people to work toward goals without feeling the need to micro-manage and team members are more likely to believe that their effort will be recognized and rewarded.
Rule #5: Foster a Development Culture
Once the organization knows its purpose it can develop an employee development system that will prepare people to increasingly contribute toward the purpose. A development system that is tightly linked with purpose, is guided by assessment, and where most learning takes place in experiential settings is likely to motivate people to become the best version of them selves. Most organizations do not have development systems in place that meet these criteria. Does yours?
This basic framework is obviously long on general ideas and short of specifics. In the following months we will publish similarly short articles that will address each of these broader topics in greater detail.
This post is submitted by Dr. Todd Darnold, Assistant Professor of Organization Behavior and Human Resource Management at Creighton University. Dr. Darnold leads Creighton's LeadershipU, a corporate training initiative for emerging leaders. Learn more at http://web.creighton.edu/business/centers-programs/creighton-leadership-u.
In our office, "boss" is a four letter word. I hate to judge such a time-honored title given to managers and supervisors--but I must. We only need to look at its official definition to know that it needed to be retired with other ancient workplace terms like "gatekeeper" or "The Man."
The verb form of boss is defined as "to be master of or over; manage; direct; control." I've worked in big and small companies--and have never had someone master over me. Therefore I guess I've never had a boss.
I've had leaders, managers, supervisors, mentors, and coaches. The model for the next generation of organizational leadership is that of "coach". Coaches teach; they help teammates visualize an outcome; they encourage; and coaches manufacture confidence. Bosses only boss.
The boss mindset of talent is a low-leverage strategy. Great leaders define and engage the work of colleagues. But to maximize the contribution of each colleague, the leader needs the full talent of each. And "bossing" merely extends the talent of the boss. It fails to unleash the talent of the bossed.
Unless you hire people that act like Roscoe P. Coltrane, don't be a
boss.
Dropping open-ended survey comments on a crowd is like a politician wooing voters with tough talk on crime or other unarguable evils. It's red meat. But it's delicious. Here are some sirloin tips we saw this week. As always, these are actual, unedited comments submitted by employees during an employee engagement survey.
- WAY TOO MANY chiefs here!
- The company consistently aims high for it's goals, but aims low for how to increase employee satisfaction.
- Es el mejor trabajo que he tenido en la vida y tengo al mejor de los jefes y me gustaría seguir siendo parte de esta excelente empresa.
- Fewer secrets and rumor control would help decrease distractions.
- The management teams actions show that the company is still first and foremost a people company.
- As a newer employee, I can't say enough great things about my experience. The people I have as coworkers and superiors have been excellent resources and mentors as I get my foundation.
- This is by far the most irresponsibly run business I have ever seen.
- The biggest problem I see within this organization is their is no accountability for employees nor management.
- personal compensation can be ambiguous at times
- My manager is flexible and since he has a family he understands the importance of family time. I really appreciate that.