The Employee Engagement Report 2011 by Blessing White

The Employee Engagement Report 2011 by Blessing White is out. The research reflects interviews with HR and line leaders as well as online survey responses of nearly 11,000 individuals from North America, India, Europe, Southeast, Asia, Australia/New Zealand, and China.

Key findings


 Fewer than 1 in 3 employees worldwide (31%) are Engaged. Nearly 1 in 5 (17%) are actually Disengaged. Engagement levels vary by region from 37% in India to 17% in China.

 Despite the rough and tumble of the economic recession, engagement levels around the world remained roughly stable when comparing early 2008 and mid-2010.

 Yet more employees are looking for new opportunities outside their organization than they were in 2008, suggesting that 2011 will be a challenging year for retention (and a hot market for firms looking to attract top talent).

 Consistent with the 2008 findings, there is a strong correlation between engagement levels and age, role/level, and tenure in the organization. Older employees and people in positions of power and authority are most likely to be Engaged. So are long-term employees (7+ years with an organization). Employees who work in departments closest to strategy decisions and customer relationships tend to be more Engaged as well.

 Engaged employees plan to stay for what they give; the Disengaged stay for what they get, suggesting that organizations can benefit from a targeted retention strategy.

 Employees worldwide view opportunities to apply their talents, career development, and training as top drivers of job satisfaction. When it comes to contribution, their needs vary considerably, reflecting their circumstances (e.g., region, age, function, engagement level).

 Trust in executives can have more than twice the impact on engagement levels than trust in immediate managers does. However, consistent with past studies, employees are more likely to trust their immediate managers than the executives in their organization.

 Managers are not necessarily doing the things that matter most. The actions that corrrelate the most with high engagement are not always the ones that receive the most favorable ratings. And in some regions relationships trump skills, that is, employees’ knowledge of their managers as “people” behind their titles appears to impact engagement levels more than manager actions.

 Executives appear to struggle with key leadership behaviors correlated to engagement, yet the findings suggest executive behaviors can have a greater potential impact on engagement than manager actions.

 Most alarming: Executives aren’t getting the basics of performance right. Creating an environment that supports high performance is the item that received the least favorable response in the entire survey; it also has among the strongest correlations with engagement levels.

And hence, despite an overall increase in engagement, more employees are headed for the door-

 Engagement surveys without visible follow-up action may actually decrease engagement levels, suggesting that organizations think twice before flipping the switch on measurement without 100% commitment for action planning based on the results.

Implications and recommendations

Three major implications have been articulated by Blessing White based on the survey findings:
1. Need for Individuals to have ownership, clarity, and action.
2. Role of Managers in coaching, relationships, and dialogue
3. Role of Executives in creating trust, communication, and culture among people.

The survey very clearly has the following crux:
1. Engagement is key.
2. Responsive and progressive organizations fare better on engagement scores.
3. Engagement is everyone's job that includes HR, line managers, executives and the employee himself/herself
4. Engaging workforce is key to building and sustaining great organizations.