Manage to Engage. Pamela Hackett

Manage to Engage - Pamela Hackett


Скачать книгу
tools help us look at what switches people on and off day to day. Seen through the lens of performance improvement, they help us see the connection between how we run our businesses, people's engagement, and the results we achieve:

      1 Fair trade

      2 A cause

      3 Clean and meaningful infrastructure

      4 Confidence

      5 Connection

      6 Collaboration

      7 Community

      8 Capability

      9 Freedom

      If people really are our greatest assets in business, our management models must reflect this; in other words, the way that we manage must lead to engagement. The result should be that our management models (how work is led – the practices and processes we use to manage and lead) become a source of competitive advantage. Our management models must deliver results, just as we expect our business and operating models (how work is done), to do so.

      Interestingly, these nine tools of engagement, which we can harness as the fuel for transformative results, are available with almost no financial cost. All that's needed is management effort – our effort.

      The MI-9 tools must be the foundation for any management model if we are to resolve the chronic lack of engagement in people at work. We must build them into the way we manage and lead. Companies that don't practice collaboration or help their people connect productively at work; that don't recognize the need to engage their people in meaningful activities and help them find a truer purpose; that haven't found a way to manage their business to bring out the best in their people, will surely fail.

      The 2018 research confirmed five things:

      1 Changes at work are not managed smoothly. This was the conclusion of three-quarters of the 2018 survey participants. Organizations were clearly failing to prepare people for – and execute – change. Respondents certainly saw the need for change, but less than 40 percent were confident this would happen. Even relatively straightforward changes to processes or procedures – the fundamental building blocks of any company – were a bumpy ride (just 28 percent said these went smoothly). If we can't get things right at the process level, what hope is there at an organizational level?

      2 The billions spent on infrastructure were not working for people. Despite the billions invested worldwide in process improvement, technology, and HR, and in systems to report information and enhance communication between people, the research suggested these were not having the desired impact. Half reported they did not have the skills and knowledge they needed to continually improve their performance. Organizations had focused too much on implementing technology and not enough on the impact on people or enabling them to use the technology. Worse still, they had not engaged people in the technology changes early or often.

      3 Communication was still ineffective. “The many” saw communication (external and internal) continuing to need dramatic improvement. From the 1970s, when communication was first ranked highly on the list of “change disarmers” to 2018, surveys found our ability to communicate information effectively throughout an organization was poor. In many organizations, nothing had changed. Without great communication, how could you possibly engage? Without understanding the role communication has in building employee confidence, you would not engage.

      4 It is a two-way street. Almost two-thirds of mid-level managers saw a lack of input from “the many” in strategic priorities. Participation was absent. Too often we still operated in a top-down world. The few dictate the future of the many; people removed from the guts of the company were deciding the business's future. Decision-making was hampered by overly complex processes and a lack of freedom to make and act on decisions, and more than half believed getting things done depended more on who rather than what you knew.

      5 80 percent of people lacked faith in leadership. Further supporting the finding that lower tiers of employees too often feel left out of the loop, survey respondents generally felt leaders’ communication effectiveness to be poor, while a third couldn't confidently say that their immediate superiors were preparing their organization effectively for the future. This dismal result is depressing for management teams, to be sure.

      Studies such as these highlight the many reasons for underengagement at work. Think of the word organization. It projects associations with orderliness, buildings filled with the rank and file of people doing as they have been instructed to do.

      The way work is done lacks humanization. Much of a company's focus has been on organizational characteristics and outcomes: the stuff that makes an organization fit. But what about the healthy side? The ability to create a workplace and culture that brings out the best in its employees. Something I think many managers and leaders want to create and inspire, but struggle to find the time and energy to work on once the “day to day” job is done. Or they simply do not know how. Health is not embedded in the DNA of a firm the same way fitness is required.

      How often do people get home from work full of enthusiasm for how they've been managed that day? Shouting to their families how much they enjoyed being managed today? Probably rarely! We have built our businesses around management models built for the exception rather than the rule – people needing to be coerced and policed into doing a good job, needing to be structured and controlled. People hearing avoidance


Скачать книгу