TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

The Employee Engagement Myth

101 pointsby lukethomasover 6 years ago

21 comments

wonderwonderover 6 years ago
In larger companies, the employee engagement industry is something that management can feel good about. For the average employee it is a series of meeting or actions that they are forced to take while still being required to complete their regular work. All while being treated as an easily replaceable cog. If you want your employees to feel engaged and happy about their work pay them well, give them a workload they can complete in 40 hours, and take the money you spent on hiring a 3rd party employee engagement team and give it back to the employees.<p>Its similar to the concept of forcing them to take personality and aptitude tests. It serves no purpose, and takes time and money. I remember having to sit through a meeting after taking one of these where the presenter explained the best way to approach members of different personality styles. My takeaway was that this is the real world and I am not going to prep to understand someones personality profile before every meeting or human interaction. No one at the manager level or above in the company as far as I am aware ever utilized it again. Lower level people tried but it had no positive results or changes to their career so they eventually abandoned it and worked for their C.O.L. increase. This is a 5k+ employee company.<p>Just treat your employees like real people who have lives and value them, best way to get employee engagement.
评论 #18210535 未加载
评论 #18210886 未加载
评论 #18211002 未加载
rpcastagnaover 6 years ago
I don&#x27;t have the context on the &quot;engagement industry&quot; or whatever that I think I need to appreciate this post as the specific criticism I think it&#x27;s trying to be, but I think people really are bitterly unsatisfied with their jobs and saying the engagement &quot;number has barely budged over the last decade&quot; despite notable corporate success is sorta missing the point?<p>The idea that people&#x27;s engagement or happiness -- or even just their general satisfaction at work -- is strongly correlated to their employing corporations&#x27; success is a persistent myth in tech that I just don&#x27;t understand. People hate &quot;sell outs&quot; and they hate themselves when they sell out for a reason. You start as someone dedicated to a craft, you end up working somewhere that pays you a lot of money to do it but without giving you the chance to put yourself into that work at all, and then you end up making soulless work that not even you really like. But it made money so it keeps going like that until it absolutely blows up and everyone has to &quot;rebrand&quot; or another company slips in as the rebranded form in your place.<p>Steph Curry is happy when the Warriors win because he&#x27;s on a team that is winning by playing the game <i>his way</i>. If the team made him go to dunk every time he got the ball I bet his satisfaction would be shit too -- and it probably wouldn&#x27;t keep netting the Warriors more rings.
评论 #18209463 未加载
评论 #18210012 未加载
评论 #18210224 未加载
评论 #18209512 未加载
vermootenover 6 years ago
Disengagement: we get emails saying how profitable we are, the directors drive super-nice cars ... but we get cost-of-living pay increases, no bonuses. Why should we be &#x27;engaged&#x27;? Feels like we&#x27;re getting ripped off.
评论 #18209538 未加载
评论 #18210396 未加载
sverigeover 6 years ago
Here&#x27;s what&#x27;s really wrong with employee engagement surveys:<p>1. Your relationship with your family is more important than any relationship at work.<p>2. For the vast majority of people, their current job may be a potential route to fulfilment, but is unlikely to be the long-term path to that, and they know it.<p>3. It is incumbent upon employees to pretend to be engaged only so long as a less draining option for meeting the financial demands for their life is not apparent.<p>4. Employee engagement surveys ultimately are only designed to justify the cost of maintaining the ongoing salary of a VP and attendant minions.<p>Yes, practice your craft, and work hard, but please just know that your fulfilment will likely come from outside of work.
canhascodezover 6 years ago
I may not be a &quot;good employee&quot;, but I tend to consider my enthusiasm as not being for sale or barter. I offer the value of my labor in exchange for money, and it would be nice if there were some coincidence of wants between myself and the persons directing my labor, but the idea that this should naturally exist, well -- that seems to have worn a bit thin in recent decades. I&#x27;m not even entirely sure that my current employer has my best interests at heart -- and I&#x27;m self-employed :)
adrian_mrdover 6 years ago
The issue is often that Employee Engagement is driven by (and wanted from) Human Resource* departments who tackle it like another checkbox to tick.<p>Real employee engagement comes from understanding that employees are unique and often have similar but different needs when it comes to what motivates them (money, ego, success, quality, output, social, etc.). The data often doesn&#x27;t reflect the fidelity needed here.<p>* or, Human Resentment, as the joke goes.
Johnny555over 6 years ago
I work for a growing startup and now, nearly 4 years in, the thing that keeps me engaged most is the potential value of my stock options.<p>The first few years the work was interesting and fun, but as the company has grown, the work has become more segmented and specialized and so much &quot;big company&quot; process has been put into place that it&#x27;s not nearly as fun, and something that I used to do myself requires coordination with several different teams and seemingly endless meetings.<p>HR (or &quot;people first&quot;, as they call themselves) is not helping, HR used to be our office manager&#x2F;HR&#x2F;facilities manager all rolled into one -- if employees wanted 2% milk in the refrigerator or an ergonomic keyboard, they only had to ask him and it was there in a few days.<p>Now we have to make a request... and get it approved (if possible, maybe it takes several levels of approval), and someone has to enter it into the purchasing system, and maybe someday I&#x27;ll get it.<p>In an effort to &quot;streamline employee benefits&quot;, benefits have been reduced, nothing added. Likewise, the &quot;unlimited free snacks, add your favorite to the list&quot; have been reduced to &quot;Here&#x27;s what you get from the vendor we outsource to&quot;<p>Our average engineering salary must be close to $200K, but it still takes VP of engineering approval to get a second $700 monitor because &quot;policy says employees only get a single monitor&quot;<p>When the new office was being planned, management asked for suggestions about how to make it more engaging, feedback was overwhelmingly against an open office plan -- the response was &quot;We are listening to your feedback, but we are going with an open office&quot;.<p>I think a lot of this comes with working at a larger company, but we&#x27;ve already lost some key early employees, and will lose more as the company grows and becomes more &quot;big company&quot; like.<p>The economics are slanted against employees as the company grows - if a 100 person company spends $100&#x2F;employee on a benefit, that&#x27;s only $10,000. If a 5000 employee company does it, that&#x27;s $500K - the cost of several HR staff, so HR can say &quot;Look, we&#x27;ve saved the company more than our own salary by streamlining benefits!&quot;<p>It&#x27;s not all bad, of course, or I wouldn&#x27;t be here, but more and more, I find myself thinking that I&#x27;m just here for the money rather than because I enjoy it.
评论 #18211678 未加载
pcurveover 6 years ago
My organization does yearly engagement survey as well as monthly. As a manager, I found them both useful. The former is useful because the vendor that conducts it does it across entire organization, and you&#x27;re able to analyze data by different departments and teams. You also get comparison metrics against industry benchmarks.<p>Also, if you&#x27;re a manager worth his&#x2F;her salt, you would probably agree with the survey result at a high level already. Where the survey comes in handy is, helping you prioritize which problems to tackle to first.<p>Sure it&#x27;s a &#x27;lagging indicator&#x27;, but that&#x27;s why the survey doesn&#x27;t focus on questions that would fluctuate highly. Examples: &quot;Does your manager give you clear directions&quot; or &quot;does your organization communicate overall company strategy&quot; etc.<p>We also supplement it with informal, brief monthly anonymous feedback that focuses more on short-term issues and qualitative data.<p>Do I want weekly survey? No. That&#x27;s what weekly 1:1 is for. You should have enough rapport with your employees that they feel comfortable sharing their concerns or joy through 1:1 channel. If not, they can always use the monthly anonymous feedback.
plumaover 6 years ago
&gt; We need to focus on figuring out how to get people to operate and deliver their best work, because if they do that, the satisfaction will follow.<p>That sounds like a shortcut to burnout. No, employee satisfaction is not based on &quot;operating and delivering their best work&quot;.<p>Being able to perform at your best is a contributing factor but employees are humans with feelings and families. Maybe treat them as humans for once.
karmakazeover 6 years ago
&gt; “Engagement” is a lagging indicator of performance, not the other way around.<p>This rang true upon reading. The other part is that the engaged employee has to feel that they contributed to that performance. Long term, if you believe it doesn&#x27;t matter how well you do things, there&#x27;s no motivation to maintain any level.<p>My situation has typically been that I take pride in my craft and as a craftsperson I want to do my best so that I do not contribute to a possible failure. Another way of saying I enable success if each group does the same. But as for degree of engagement, the more autonomy I&#x27;m given the more engaged I&#x27;ll be as I&#x27;ll see to making each choice I make work out.
leetroutover 6 years ago
I look forward to your future posts and I hope one of them addresses open office plans and how they negatively affect the workplace.
评论 #18209053 未加载
minipci1321over 6 years ago
Another definition of mine: employee engagement is the proportion of the total employee cost that can be cut before the productivity starts decreasing, over the total of these expenses. Ranges between 0% and 100%. &quot;100% engaged&quot; ==&gt; most probably the business owner: ready to pay all expenses from own pocket.
评论 #18209228 未加载
Nasrudithover 6 years ago
Reminds me of the one stereotype with HR - they&#x27;ll do anything to try to motivate employees except spending money on them.
评论 #18211080 未加载
vyrotekover 6 years ago
&gt; <i>&quot;I challenge you to find a vendor in this space who puts some skin in the game, charging by results delivered to the income statement. Vendors have an incentive to ensure that engagement scores stay low, otherwise, they don’t have a product to sell.&quot;</i><p>I worked for years in this space at my startup but we found success coming at it from a different angle. We started with a gamification platform and transitioned into enterprise integrations to measure &quot;Employee Engagement&quot;. The difference was that we didn&#x27;t just measure it through employee surveys but through objective goals on measurable KPIs. Essentially we hooked into live data sources from our customers and provided a way for managers to create leaderboards, achievements, goals, etc. against it.<p>Every time we renewed our contract with our customers we would measure and compare the performance of employees using the system against to those who were not and provide an ROI report. Most of our customers felt it was a no-brainer to renew once you could tie our costs to their increased revenue.<p>&gt; <i>&quot;While measuring on a more frequent interval is a helpful start, the act of measuring doesn’t lead to improvement. It’s like if I step on a scale and expect to lose weight. If I couple the measurement with action, change can be made.&quot;</i><p>I think what it boils down to is <i>&quot;If you can&#x27;t measure it, you can&#x27;t improve it.&quot;</i>. It&#x27;s very difficult to measure something nebulous such as Employee Engagement which is an intangible moving target.
评论 #18209167 未加载
评论 #18210355 未加载
lifeisstillgoodover 6 years ago
Try the &quot;Citizen Engagement Myth&quot;. Without democracy we don&#x27;t even bother imaging our views will be taken into account by our government<p>And the less often we vote for people further away the less our vote engages us<p>What we need are local elections for local bodies with genuine power and spend, and democratic companies.
paulie_aover 6 years ago
If you are not doing anything with metrics and kpis and random other pointless terms it is a waste of time. Employees and managers need ongoing coaching. Not just some assessment which wastes people&#x27;s time. Engagement is only one of many factors to take into account.
WhitneyLandover 6 years ago
<i>“The idea that engagement drives performance is backward logic that doesn’t make a bit of sense.”</i><p>I think a more accurate assessment is, trying to increase on a broad scale levels for the the typical employee with measurable bottom line impact is questionable.<p>Employee engagement is huge if it’s authentic and high powered. Take the top 5% at any company. Likely no software product made them that way, it’s just who they are.<p>Separately, that these companies don’t charge by impact to the bottom line is not really fair. Many companies don’t work that way. I don’t think McKinsey will give you strategy advice and then take a cut, unless it was a pretty binary scenario.
asplakeover 6 years ago
It’s one of those assymetries: disengagement is much easier to create than engagement, and hard to repair
jimjimjimover 6 years ago
in my experience: without fail, a company will punish a department or office that tries to improve things by answering truthfully on an engagement survey.
sytelusover 6 years ago
TLDR;<p><i>For over a decade, Gallup has measured engagement on an almost daily basis and the number has barely budged over the last decade. The number tends to stay in the low 30% range — this strategy is a PR dream. Year after year, Gallup can state that “the majority of the workforce is disengaged.” They then proceed to sell products&#x2F;services to improve the score. It’s the gift that keeps on giving!</i>
评论 #18211884 未加载
vram22over 6 years ago
A word of advice to the emp. eng. peeps:<p>Just cut all the BS.<p>Give emps. some PS.<p>Watch emp. eng. n biz soar.<p>The stock mkt. will roar.<p>- VR<p>[PS = Profit Sharing ]