1 A MINOR PROJECT REPORT ON EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT IN STRATEGIC DECISION MAKING Submitted in partial fulfillment of requirement of Bachelor of Business Administration (B.B.A) General BBA III Semester (Morning) (A) Batch 2011-2014 Submitted to: Submitted by: Dr. Ruchi Singhal Narendra Barwal Designation 01714101711
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1
A MINOR PROJECT REPORT
ON
EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT IN STRATEGIC
DECISION MAKING
Submitted in partial fulfillment of requirement of Bachelor of
Business Administration (B.B.A) General
BBA III Semester (Morning) (A)
Batch 2011-2014
Submitted to: Submitted by:
Dr. Ruchi Singhal Narendra Barwal
Designation 01714101711
JAGANNATH INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT SCHOOL,
KALKAJI
2
STUDENT’S UNDERTAKING
I hereby certify that this is my original work and it has never been
submitted elsewhere.
Project Guides:
By Narendra Barwal
Faculty
3
CONTENTS
Description Page No.
Contents with page no. (i)
Acknowledgment
List of tables
List of figures
Executive Summary
Certificate of completion
Introduction to topic
Objectives
Literature review
Company Profile
Research Methodology
Analysis & Interpretation
Findings & Inferences
Limitations
Recommendations and Conclusion
Appendices
Bibliography
4
Acknowledgement
5
List of Tables
6
Executive summary
Employee Engagement: fact or fad? If you are reading this executive
summary you are no doubt already aware of employee engagement becoming
an ever more important priority for business. The vital lessons learned by some
of the world’s leading businesses in creating, implementing and measuring there
employee engagement programs provide benchmark data to ensure that the
reader is well-informed about this critical topic.
The Hay Group defines engaged performance as “a result that is achieved
by stimulating employees’ enthusiasm for their work and directing it towards
organization success. The result can only be achieved when employees offer an
implicit contract to their employees that elicit specific positive behavior aligned
with organization’s goals”.
Employee engagement is associated with many desirable outcomes, such
as job satisfaction, intention to stay and job performance. Companies with a
greater number of engaged employees typically have lower operating cost,
higher customer satisfaction and higher profits. There is a tangible monetary
benefit to companies investing time and resources in fostering higher
engagement within their employees.
We also explore the specific roles and responsibilities of the workforce in
building a more engaged organization. Our focus: individual employees,
managers, and executives. These three roles are incremental, depending on
someone’s level in the organization: Everyone is accountable for his or her own
engagement; anyone with direct reports much coach team members to higher
level of engagement and manages his or her own engagement; and executives
set the tone for an engaged organization plus shoulder the responsibility of
individuals and managers.
Everyday Activities Leading To Greater Engagement
There some everyday activities that can lead to greater employee engagement. It
begins with looking at the experience of new employee, and continues
throughout the employee experience.
7
Some examples of activities that can assist new employees feel engaged
include:
Providing the new employee with a realistic preview of the job
Considering ways to welcome them on the first day of work, and in
advance some workplace have current employees send emails to
welcome new employee prior to the first of work
Having through orientation that includes information about the job, and
also information about how people treat each other and the climate to
which every employee is expected to positively contribute
Considering the employee development plan from day one- what would be
helpful for every employee to know? Who would be useful for the new
employee to connect with in the first couple days?
8
Certificate of completion
9
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
There is no single method to engaging employees in their work and in the
organization. Instead, there are a number of critical components that contribute
to engagement. These critical components include: workplace relationships, the
workload, the amount of control within the workplace, the reward/ recognition
structure, support, perceived fairness in the workplace, and ability to have
10
meaningful and valued work. One approach to creating engagement is that there
is a level of reciprocal interdependence necessary for the individual to engage
and for the organization to success.
Engagement, represented here as a two-way relationship between employee and
employer where engaged employees are expected to also have an
under0standing of the unit and work to be done, has to do with how individuals
employ themselves in the performance in their job and involves the active use of
emotions and behaviors in addition to what they know about their jobs.
Engagement is realized through a series of interactions between the employee
and the manager or supervisor (representing the organization). The goal would
be to create interaction that would evolve into trusting, loyal, and mutual
commitments leading to full engagement in the workplace. It was best state by
Saks (2006), “when employee believes that their organization is concerned about
them and cares about their well-bring, they are likely to respond by attempting to
fulfill their obligation to their organization by becoming more engaged.”
Management behavior plays a key role in developing engagement through the
relationship they build with employees, and behaving in a way that they are
supported and play a critical role in the success of the unit. The application of
these principles to developing a process for employees to be involved in
decisions related to the workplace, and to the unit, provide a significant
opportunity to that end. It is imported to note that employee engagement is a
long-term and ongoing process that requires continued interaction over time in
order to generate obligation and a state of reciprocal interdependence.
Define “Engagement” and why the “Old Definition” Need to be
changed
The original definition of employee engagement focused on the tools used to
make employee feel engaged and encourage employee engagement.
One tool used to determine a company’s level of employee engagement is
surveys. Surveys are a great way to measure employee engagement level. They
11
provide an idea of how satisfied employees are, and how to increase their job
satisfaction. However, surveys have their flaws. Take for example a case where
a survey is used to evaluate factors in employee engagement. An employee who
might be very comfortable in the current job and not want to be promote might
give a low rating for satisfaction within opportunity for advancement since the
employee has no interest in advancing. The overall impact on the employee’s
engagement may not be affected yet the survey might misattribute a result that a
low satisfaction score in this case leads to less employee engagement. Because
of these ambiguities surveys can often be misleading.
Some example include interviews, confrontation meeting and reward system.
These are all great tools, but they too can have their flaws. For this reason a
definition for employee engagement should encompass more than just the tool it
takes to make employee feel engaged. Definition should also include condition
which lead to employee engagement as well as what it takes to create an
environment where employee feel engaged.
The “New Definition” for Engagement
Redefining engagement as a heightened emotional connection that an employee
feels for his or her organization, that influences him or her to exert greater
discretionary effort to his or her work” provides the framework In which
engagement activity operates.
12
Employee Engagement Defined By different companies
CORPORATIONS
Caterpillar
Engagement is the extent of employees’ commitment, work effort, and desire to
stay in an organization.
Dell Inc.
Engagement: To compete today, companies need to win over the MINDS
(rational commitment) and the HEARTS (emotional commitment) of employees in
ways that lead to extraordinary effort.
Intuit, Inc.
Engagement describes how an employee thinks and feels about, and acts toward
his or her job, the work experience and the company.
CONSULTANTS and RESEARCHERS
13
Corporate Leadership Council
Engagement: The extent to which employees commit to something or someone
in their organization, how hard they work and how long they stay as a result of
that commitment.
Development Dimensions International
Engagement is the extent to which people enjoy and believe in what they do, and
feel valued for doing it.
The Gallup Organization
Employee engagement is the involvement with and enthusiasm for work
Hewitt Associates
Engagement is the state of emotional and intellectual commitment to an
organization or group producing behavior that will help fulfill an organization’s
promises to customers – and, in so doing, improve business results.
Engaged employees:
Stay – They have an intense desire to be a part of the organization and
they stay with that organization;
Say – They advocate for the organization by referring potential employees
and customers, are positive with co-workers and are constructive in their
criticism;
Strive – They exert extra effort and engage in behaviors that contribute to
business success.
Institute for Employment Studies
Engagement: A positive attitude held by the employee toward the organization
and its values. An engaged employee is aware of business context, and works
with colleagues to improve performance within the job for the benefit of the
14
organization. The organization must work to develop and nurture engagement,
which requires a two-way relationship between employer and employee.
Kenexa
Engagement is the extent to which employees are motivated to contribute to
organizational success, and are willing to apply discretionary effort (extra time,
brainpower and effort) to accomplishing tasks that are important to the
achievement of organizational goals.
Towers Perrin
Engagement is the extent to which employees put discretionary effort into their
work, beyond the required minimum to get the job done, in the form of extra time,
brainpower or energy
CHAPTER 2
15
Companies with high employee engagement have profit margins nearly three
times larger than that of organization with disengaged workers, according to a
study by Towers Watson.
Employees who believe that their companies are high-performance deliver
sustainable engagement scores 16 percentage points higher than the overall
country norm, found the Global workforce study, which surveyed 32,000
employees globally – 1,000 of which were from Canada.
However, more than two-third (67 per cent) of Canadian workers are not fully
engaged in their work and are frustrated by insufficient support from their
organizations.
"When workers are not fully engaged, it leads to increased risk for employers. It
makes companies more vulnerable to lower productivity and higher inefficiency,
greater rates of absenteeism and turnover and increased costs for chronic
illnesses," said France Deferens, leader of Towers Watson's talent and rewards
practice in Montreal. "Without more attention to the fundamentals of sustainable
engagement — including improving on-the-job support for employees and
increasing efforts to deepen employees' sense of attachment to the organization
— employers will have a harder time generating growth and returns."
The Global Workforce Study breaks new ground in understanding and measuring
what contributes to sustained employee engagement, said Towers Watson. The
equation for sustainable engagement is the sum of three distinct elements:
•Traditional engagement: Employees' willingness to give effort to their
employer.
•Enablement: Having the tools, resources and support to get work done
efficiently.
•Energy: A work environment that actively supports physical, emotional and
interpersonal well-being.
16
"Enablement and energy are the really critical factors in this equation," said
Ofelia Isabel, Towers Watson's Canadian leader for talent and rewards. "It's only
in the last few years, when we've seen more pressure in the system, that the
importance of enablement and energy has risen to the forefront."
Companies have known for years that engagement is important to performance,
what's now clear is the significance of effective workplace resources and
interpersonal well-being, along with an understanding of the role that senior
leadership plays in sustaining that well-being, said Julie Naismith, a senior talent
and rewards consultant at Towers Watson.
According to the study, virtually all (95 per cent) of highly engaged Canadian
employees believe that that they have the work tools and resources they need to
achieve exceptional performance — compared to only 20 per cent of disengaged
employees.
Similar disparities appear with regard to the ability to sustain energy throughout
the workday (97 per cent versus 32 per cent) and sense of personal
accomplishment at work (99 per cent versus 33 per cent).
However, amongst all Canadian survey participants, only one-third (38 per cent)
believe that their organization and senior leaders encourage and support a
healthy workforce and just 39 per cent think that senior leaders have a sincere
interest in their well-being, found the survey.
17
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT
Over the past decade, the way in people are managed and developed of work
has comet be recognized as one of the primary factors in achieving improvement
in organizational performance. This reflected by popular idioms such as “people
are our most important assets”. Back in the good old days of cooperate world,
things were pretty simple. Companies put people on career tracks straight out of
college; they gave employees a job for life and waved them good bye with a gold
watch at retirement. The promise of the stable life as a company employee kept
both morale and productivity high. Then things changed. Competition increased,
18
margins shrank and shareholder got more demanding. Suddenly, company staff
were finding the very job security they’d counted on was disappearing, and at
speed. This upheaval meant companies had to find new ways to motivate their
employees in order to make them more productive since, without stability,
employees were looking for something else from their employers. And thus,
Engagement was born. In itself, engagement isn’t really a new idea; owners and
managers have been talking about engagement, in one form or another, for
centuries… they just used different words to express it. In former times,
engagement focused more on productivity and achieving results through threat of
punishment or by means of reward. But common sense- and good
communication- eventually won out and, today organization everywhere are
spending serious money on all forms of employee engagement. Boiled down, it
simply means ‘developing a happy and loyal workforce’. Enlightened managers
now realized that any company as a whole will benefit when its employees know
what’s going on and they feel defining what makes a workforce happy, and in
understanding how this good will translates into company success. From the
extant literature review, it is acknowledged that successful organizations share a
fundamental philosophy of valuing and investing in their employees. In fact many
research studies have described human resources management as a means of
achieving competitive advantage. Consistent with this it is an equally important
issue for the organization to retain their critical (core) employees. Most
organization today continues to struggle with retention because they are relying
on salary increase and bonuses t prevent turnover. Essentially more organization
is now realizing that relation is a strategic issue and continues to be competitive
advantage. The term “engagement” stems from the work of Kahn (1990) who
distinguished between being engaged and disengaged at work. Putting the
humanistic factors together, bear, spectre, Lawrence, Quinn-Mills and Walton
(1984) created the ‘Harvard Business School’ model of HRM which focused on
people in an organization to be the key resources. In light of such critical
emphasis being placed on human capital, Paula Ketter has aptly noted.
“Engagement is all about creating a culture where people do not feel misused,
overused, underused or abused”. At a very basic level, employee engagement
19
draws from the tenets of the ‘Hierarchy of Needs’ as conceptualized by Maslow,
the highest stage of which is self-actualization; the pinnacle of an individual’s
fulfillment of talent and potential. The theory of ‘higher order needs’ was largely
overlooked in the heydays of scientific ‘assembly line’ manufacturing.
10 Common Themes: How Companies Measure Engagement
Employers typically assess their employees’ engagement levels with company-
wide attitude or opinion surveys. (See “Employee-Engagement Survey Items:
Samples.”) A sampling of the criteria featured in such instruments reveals 10
common themes related to engagement:
1. Pride in employer
2. Satisfaction with employer
3. Job satisfaction
4. Opportunity to perform well at challenging work
5. Recognition and positive feedback for one’s contributions
6. Personal support from one’s supervisor
7. Effort above and beyond the minimum
8. Understanding the link between one’s job and the organization’s mission
9. Prospects for future growth with one’s employer
10. Intention to stay with one’s employer
20
Employee Engagement: Five Companies That Get It
1. Make it Strategic: Intel Corporation
Set the stage for employee buy-in by sharing a vision that ties engagement
Efforts to your core vision and larger business strategy—something Intel does by
Calculating each employee’s annual bonus according to sustainability results. By
Challenging all departments to improve their processes and products with
sustainability in mind, Intel celebrates the diversity of its professionals while
increasing accountability for multiple dimensions of value creation and impact.
2. Make it Personal: Hyatt Hotels & Resorts
Issues like climate change and biodiversity are complex, but framing these big
issues in relatable terms is not impossible. Take inspiration from Hyatt: The