Engagement alone doesn't help

I am on holiday in Montreal, but the Canadian National Post has a research report in their productive conversations series on Revisiting workforce engagement by Ofelia Isabel. This is based on a Towers Watson study of engagement. I thought that at least Luis Suarez would be interested.

Their basic framework expands engagement into three additional E-words: effort (what people can do), energy (capacity to maintain that effort), and enablement (capability to do the work, mostly from an infrastructure perspective).

I like that this is talking in more detail. The key for me is what organizations expect to SEE when they have this mythical engagement. The three E's here are part of the puzzle. In the end, though I hope organizations are looking for ideas that will help ensure that they get things - the right things - done.

2 Comment(s)

It's nice that they attempted to use all "E" words but they are poor choices since they can lead you down the wrong path from what was intended. Anyway, most employers leave what they call Energy up to the employee (self-training). The infrastructure required for Enablement must include managerial accountability for basic management practices, and not just various tools. Nick Forrest (no relation) has commented that when don't hold managers accountable for the output of their commands you will end up with a responsibility culture, so people work on what they think should be done which is often not the right things. Great find on vacation.

Nathan Moore said:

Well, I agree with you Forrest! As an employee, employers should do their parts to maintain the good relationship between employers and employees.

Leave a comment


Previous entry: Collaboration defined … but what does it look like?

Next entry: The New Social Learning

Picture a steaming coffee cup. Better yet, grab one and have a read!

KJolt Memberships

Follow jackvinson on Twitter

View Jack Vinson's profile on LinkedIn