Employee Engagement - Business Intelligence and Sunday Morning Football

Yesterday I read the MacLeod review on employeeimportant, but not as an abstract concept. Here HR
engagement, 'Engaging for Success'. It bought to mindprofessionals have to work with their colleagues in
my experience as a Sunday footballer. Much of theother functional areas such as sales and marketing
time I played in teams who were at the bottom orand production. If your organisation wants to be more
close to the bottom of the league. Getting out of bedinnovative because this will better serve your
on a Sunday morning was miserable. The pitchescustomers with the products and services that they
were always too wet or too hard. The knocks alwaysneed then we can use engagement measures as part
hurt. And what has this got to do with David MacLeodof the executive dashboard. There is a narrative that
and Nita Clarke's report? Well, it reminded me thatthe executive team will understand and which can be
when I played in a team that did very well, funnilytested. Let us say that our customers want new
enough getting out of bed was easy, the pitches wereproducts at lower prices but with higher quality. We
great and it was easy to shrug off bumps and bruises.can measure all of these things. How many new
Under all the criteria of engagement I would say that Iproducts we release, whether they are variations or
was much more engaged when we were winning.whether they are standalone new products. What
Did we win because we were more engaged, or didprice points we are able to achieve and what are the
our winning make us more engaged? I think that thislevels of quality. And so on.
lies at the heart of a lot of the frustration that HRNow measure engagement. Don't over do the
professionals currently feel. They see Rolls Roycemeasurements at first. Why not start with the question
companies such as Diageo, Astra Zeneca and, oh,that Dr Jim Hartner of Gallup and Dr Frank Schmidt of
Rolls Royce being held up as shining lights that havethe University of Iowa found to have the most
'got' this engagement thing. They see the 'compelling'effective correlation to performance, "At work, do you
evidence that those companies that were in the tophave an opportunity to do what you do best
engagement quartile were 12% more profitable andeveryday?" Then drill into the data. Is there a
18% more productive and had earnings per share 2.6correlation between areas of high engagement and
the level of those below the 50th percentile. So why isthe outputs that the organisation wishes to achieve? If
the Board not falling over themselves to adopt anthere is, then get to understand that specific area
engagement strategy? It boils down, in my mind, tobetter. Is there a causation? What is driving that
whether you are seeing the cause or the effect?difference? Is it better and more appropriate
Believe me, in a lot of the teams I played in no matterleadership? Or do the people there have a better
how engaged we were, we would still have beenunderstanding of what they are supposed to be doing,
rubbish.or have better information or understand how they fit
So let's get back to first principles. Peter Druker,into the overall scheme of things?
whose centenary it is this year, said that a business isThen, put a value on it. Marcus Buckingham in his white
"defined by the want the customer satisfies when hepaper 'The Strengths Engagement Track: A
or she buys a product or a service. To satisfy theBenchmark Study of Sixty-Five High Performing
customer is the mission and purpose of everyTeams' gives the fascinating example of a US Retail
business". When customers stop wanting horse drawngiant with 3,000 stores that plotted store profit against
buggies or gas lamps or video players, no matter howa geographic economic potential measure and was
good we are at it and how engaged our staff are weable to highlight one store trading at a profit of
will be out of business. To achieve the function of a$1,500,000 and one trading at a loss of $300,000 with
business we assemble people, land and capital and wethe same economic potential, the same products and
do this in the best possible way to deliver to thosethe same marketing. What would this mean to the
customers.executive? Well $1,800,000.
Having said all of this, let me be clear, engagement is