GOING FOR EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT
Duda Owner IONOS • April 7, 2015
Fortune has published its annual “The 100 Best Companies To Work For” (Milton Moskowitz and Robert Levering, March 15, 2015, pp. 97–154). In addition to its momentous list, Fortune included some of the latest research on employee engagement. Survey data from Gallup identifies an inverse correlation of employee engagement and company size. The research indicates (p. 109):
- Employee engagement maximizes where interpersonal relationships thrive.
- Companies of 5,000 employees and larger have an employee engagement rate of 29% and an actively disengaged rate of 20%.
- Companies of less than 10 employees have an employee engagement rate of 42% and an actively disengaged rate of 5%.
Size matters, but the root cause is the opportunity level for professionals to strengthen their interpersonal relationships. Company size alone only tells us part of the story. Perhaps this is another case of the best beats the big (see “When the Best Beats the Big” Blog.reliableinsights.com, March 31, 2015). This raises some interesting and challenging questions:
- What can companies do to enhance the quality and intensity of interpersonal relationships?
- What will a large company have to do to build exceptionally great employee engagement?
- Can the drivers of large-company growth be compatible with the drivers of exceptionally great employee engagement?
What every front desk professional should know about credit card surcharging
Is a college degree still worth the investment? It depends of the path you craft.
You need to give serious thought to taming the tiger before you are in its cage.
My transparent reflection about my five-year post-layoff experience, how I navigated it, learned through it, and identified some wisdom that might inspire others.
The earliest days of this series present fundamentally significant leadership content.
We explore the overuse or inappropriate use of the words "honest," "honesty," and "honestly." Much of the overuse or inappropriate use of these words is in contexts that intrinsically message the audience that the speaker is not trustworthy. I call the overuse or inappropriate use of these words in this context HONESTY VALIDATORS because the speaker believes they validate the truth being spoken. We need a solution to this problem. My solution is to replace these honesty validators with CLARITY VALIDATORS. Instead of trying to be honest, try to be clear. Replacing "honest," "honesty," and "honestly," with "clear," "clarity," and "clearly," produces significantly more benefit to the speaker and to the audience.
What the Boeing 737 Max crashes teach us about training, corporate culture, and communication.