Each month, "Management Matters" addresses management and leadership issues essential to achieving exceptional business results while growing and developing people. Please enjoy "Management Matters", and pass it on!
All Content © LeaderPoint
An exhaustive workplace study by Gallup1 revealed that only 30% of people in the workforce are fully engaged at work, and that 20% are actively disengaged. The conclusion drawn by the authors is that the single most important variable influencing employee engagement is the boss. In other words, bad management is the main cause for lack of engagement that leads to poorer results in areas like productivity, customer ratings, quality and profitability.
Also from Gallop’s findings, the 25% best-managed teams delivered significantly better results than the bottom 25%: 50% fewer accidents and 41% fewer quality defects. Gallop estimates that disengagement costs companies $500 billion per year. Furthermore, the top teams generated much lower healthcare costs; so...bad managers also cause bad health! We agree with the conclusion that bad managers are the cause of a lot of these ills, and that management makes a big difference—not only in the results people get, but also in their lives. But what to do about it? How do companies overcome a dearth of good managers?
First, let’s look more closely at Gallop’s survey. The workforce study has been conducted by Gallop since 2000 and is based on its Q12 instrument developed in the 1990s. The assessment has focused on 12 questions derived from extensive testing to serve as indicators for engagement. Interestingly, these questions tend to target factors that are established intrinsic motivators, such as: autonomy (“at work my opinions seem to count”), purpose (“the purpose of my company makes me feel my job is important”), chance to use skills (“have the opportunity to do what I do best every day”), chance to develop (“had opportunities at work to learn and grow”), be part of a winning team (“my associates or fellow employees are committed to doing quality work”), and clear expectations (“I know what is expected of me at work”). It is worth noting that only one of the twelve questions asks specifically about recognition and praise.
Much management literature recommends that managers focus on increasing engagement by working to “emotionally engage” their employees and to find ways to engage with each employee. Thus, engagement surveys are a popular tool of human resource departments. To the degree that engagement serves as a proxy for good management, Gallop’s Q12 survey may indeed be a good tool to use, and engagement may be a valid metric. But it can also mislead the manager from the primary job of driving great results. A common formula for achieving engagement is shown in diagram below. Specifically, great managers should first engage employees so that they perform at a high level in order to achieve results.
This model, however, focuses the manager's attention on trying to engage employees, which can lead to all kinds of mischief that distracts both the manager and the employee from the work and its results. An alternative model is depicted in the next diagram. Here the manager focuses first on the required results in planning, assigning, organizing and monitoring the work. That is, the manager is focused on identifying and communicating the required results through policies that give clear outcomes, then providing feedback on progress towards those outcomes. Performance is owned by the individual, and engagement is a consequence of the manager effectively focusing employees on the work, organizing them effectively, and giving them feedback on results so that they can adjust and improve their performance as needed.
In fact, Gallop’s survey questions echo this focus—provide employees purpose, give them big jobs under the guidance of policy, and provide opportunities for mastery. To the degree that managers do THESE things well, they will get engagement.
Jim Clifton, the CEO of Gallup concludes his opening letter to the report, “Let's get rid of managers from hell, double the number of great managers [and] everything will change.” The report itself calls for companies to select the right managers, “treat these roles as unique with distinct functional demands that require a specific talent set.” Fortunately, effective management is something that can be learned—and perhaps more than a "talent set," it requires a distinct “skill set.” This calls for management development for those who are placed in positions of being in charge. Improve management effectiveness, and high engagement scores will surely follow.
1"State of the American Workplace: Employee Engagement Insights for U.S. Business Leaders." 2013 by Gallop. http://www.gallup.com/services/176708/state-american-workplace.aspx
For more information about LeaderPoint, and to access our Reading Room of management articles, visit www.leaderpoint.biz, or call 913-384-3212.