Gallop’s definition of an engaged employee “Works with passion and feels a profound connection to their company and they drive innovation and move the organization forward.”
But on average only 30% of employees fall into that category. 50% fall into the Not-Engaged group. Here is how not-engaged is described:
“Employees are essentially “checked out.” They’re sleepwalking through their workday and putting in time — but not energy or passion — into their work.” Just by the definition difference between the two you can feel the impact engaged employees would have compared to not-engaged.
What if you could double the number of engaged employees, from 30 % to 60%, what effect do you think that could have on how your customers feel about you and the impact on your bottom line?
Most businesses say “our employees are our most important asset”, but the reality is something different. How much time and effort is really spent on improving engagement – by increased training – by doing surveys to see how much their employees are actually engaged at work? Maybe business owners don’t really think they have much control over their employee engagement – i.e. you either hired a great employee or you didn’t – so there is not much I can do to improve the situation.
This is just not true, businesses can go from not having an engaging work place to a very engaged work place – with the same employees. All they have to do is decide that having a 30% engaged workforce is costing them customer satisfaction, time, unhappy employees, hire turnover, productivity, profit and causing lower quality and higher absenteeism.
Gallop also quantified some of the reasons you want highly engaged employees.
• Businesses in the top 25% of employee engagement do significantly better in productivity, profitability, and customer ratings than the companies in the bottom 25%.
• Companies with 9.3 engaged workers for every actively disengaged, experienced 147% higher earnings compared to competition. In contract, companies with 2.6 engaged workers for every actively disengaged worker experienced 2% lower earnings than the competition.
Do you believe these numbers? It’s pretty obvious that companies that have engaged employees would have superior productivity, profitability and customer ratings. Isn’t it just good business to work toward this?
It is more of an attitude shift of the owner than a hard cost to the business to get there. Next post we will get into how to have a highly engaged workforce – how to weave it into the fabric of how your business operates.