Keeping Employees Engaged

To: Human Resouce Professionals responsible for hiring & keeping new employee.

All of us involved in the human resource game know that the days of lifetime employment are long since over. Some argue that future employees will have as many as 10 employers in their careers. And perhaps that number is low. But should we just sit back and accept that thinking, or can we think of alternatives that will boost the tenure of our new employees from 3 to 5 years to 5 to 7 years and save on the very expensive and disruptive process of replacing employees.

Or, should it even matter? Perhaps the new business-normal is one of high turnover. That is, one in which employers expect employees to leave them after 2 or 3 years. Maybe we should even be planning for it in our strategic plans. But it doesn't seem natural, does it? Maybe it would feel better if the time period was 4 years, after all, we go to 4 years of high school and 4 years of college. But even that seems out of place, especially in high tech companiesl So how do we begin to address the problem of high turnover and low engagement?

Let's ask, why do employees stay with companies? For a long time scholars held that there are two primary reasons why an employee continues with the same organization. One, job satisfaction. If an employee is satisfied with his or her job, his or her work group etc. he or she will stay engaged with the organization. Secondly, if the employee is committed to the organization, the work group, or the work itself, she or he will more than likely stay engaged.

We can all understand job satisfaction when we experience it. What about organizational commitment? What is it? Scholars have debated this for a long time. For some time Meyer, Allen & Smith (1993) and Meyer, & Allen (1997) hold that there are three types of organizational commitment. First, there is affective commitment, second, continuance commitment, and finally normative commitment. An affectively committed employee is committed because he wants to be an employee of that organization (they are emotionally committed to their employer because they feel their values are similar), continuous commited employees are commited because they need to be (they have few alternatives), normatively committed employees are committed to their employer because they feel they ought to be (they believe they owe their commitment to the employer because of the opportunity they were given).

Is it possible that young graduates are not getting something out of the employment experiencce that causes them to leave? Is it possible that the parents of those young employees were viewed as not being treated well by their employers when they werre downsized, or right-sized and the like. Do you think that maybe those young graduates believe their parents gave their all to the organization, but were still dumped in the end and decided that they would not give their allegience to any company who can rationalise pulling someone out of their job without treating them justly? Or are these young people used to getting what they want and when they want it, and if they don't they pick up their marbles and go joing another game. May our focus should not be on why they leave but on why the stay. Perhaps if we can answe the question, "why do you stay with this employer so long", or "what keeps you here?" We might learn more of what we can do to keep the turnover rate higher.

There are scholars asking those questions and working on new explnations of why employees continue to stay engaged with their existing employer. I will have more to write about that in our next piece. In the meantime, I hope this blog gives hiring managers some food for thought. You have a difficult job and I expect it is about to get more difficult in the next few years.

Reference List:
Meyer, J.P., Allen, N.J., & Smith, C.A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology 78(4), 538-551.

Meyer, J.P. & Allen, N.J. Commitment in the workplace: Theory research and application. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications

Glenn J. Forte, President
Collective Knowledge Advisors, LLC
517 E. Lancaster Avenue
Suite #402
Downingtown, PA 19335
Ph. 610.269.7851
Cell: 484.880.8862
email: gjforte@ckallc.com
Website: www.ckallc.com

Time Management Plan - TMP

Do you have enough time to get your job done? Do you plan your day, week, month, quarter, and year? Or is your time, or lack of it, controlling you?

In my recruiting practice, I see evidence all over the place that managers, like myself, aren't planning effectively. I send executive resumes to senior managers and quite often don't hear back from them until the really good candidates are already hired by their competitor. It is almost as frustrating as a hiring manager nit-picking a resume to death and ultimately not even talking to a really great candidate. But they are specific issues and pet peeves of my own.

Our time is an asset that belongs to us that we often let other people and/or circumstances control. Think about these common scenarios. How often do you send an email to a subordinate that is answered within a minute or two of you clicking on the send button? How often do you find yourself being controlled by the telephone, email, or people coming into your office to "talk?"

Last evening my son called me to tell me that he was listening to Howard Stern a few days earlier, and that Howard reminded him of me. I braced for the answer of how that possibly could be. He said that Howard was talking about time managment that he learned from Covey/Franklin Planner. He said, dad, "he sounded just like you several years ago."

Here's what he meant. I preached for several years about all of my direct reports having their own TMP, and actually made them submit one to me. What Howard learned, I learned several years ago. You need to manage your time: First set a time to read your email, once in the morning, and once in the afternoon. Let me assure you that you will be tempted to sneek looks at it between times. Don't give in. You can also check at the end of the day if you wish. Do the same thing with phone calls that you can return. Set a time each day to return calls, again in the morning and afternoon. When someone calls before the time designated, ask them if you can call back betwee xtime and xtime and then do it. Do the same thing with your direct reports, unless an emergency (a real one) ask them to stay out of your office until the time allocated. When do you do all this planning. I do it first thing in the morning, others I know do it in the evening for the next day. I also do it for each week and the entire month.

My suggestion; try it for one month, give it an honest go. Avoid the temptations of not sticking with it, and see if you don't find even more time to available to get other things done. Once you master it, you will find the potential that time provides is considerably rewarding.

Like Howard, I've used a Franklin/Covey planer for just about 13 years. They are excellent tools, but not the only ones. The point is, you need a tool like them to work your TMP effectively but it doesn't have to be fancy or complicated. Good luck managing your time.


Glenn J. Forte, President
Collective Knowledge Advisors, LLC
517 E. Lancaster Avenue, Suite #402
Downingtown, PA 19335
ph. 610.269.7851
fx. 610.269.9852
email: gjofrte@ckallc.com