On this page:

Employee Engagement in the Public Sector: A Review of Literature

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHAPTER 6 MEASUREMENT AND MONITORING OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT

Introduction

6.1 The research findings discussed in Chapter 5 imply that levels of engagement within an organisation can have substantial and measurable impacts upon the outputs of the organisation, whether that output is profit, productivity, customer/public satisfaction, achievement of strategies and objectives, or successful implementation of reform. As highlighted by Robinson et al (2004) it makes sense for organisations to monitor the engagement levels of employees and to take action to increase these if necessary. CIPD (2007a) also highlights the importance of monitoring levels of employee engagement as a key element in managing the organisation's human capital.

6.2 This chapter explores methods the literature suggests are good practice regarding how employee engagement can be measured. The chapter is structured under the following sections:

  • Measurement at the recruitment stage
  • Measurement among existing employees
  • Monitoring engagement.

Measurement at the recruitment stage

6.3 The Schmidt (2004) model presented in Figure 4.3 on the organisational dynamics of the public sector noted that the foundation of the model on which workplace well-being, employee engagement and ultimately organisational performance and the furtherance of the public good was based, was recruiting and retaining the right workforce. Penna (2007) recommends that employers don't just hire for competence but hire for attitude and alignment with the organisation's values. On this basis, McGee (2006)) discusses research by Development Dimensions International ( DDI) which involved over 4,000 employees in a variety of industries and revealed six characteristics that predict the likelihood of individuals becoming engaged employees:

  • Adaptability;
  • Passion for work;
  • Emotional maturity;
  • Positive disposition;
  • Self-efficacy; and
  • Achievement orientation.

6.4 According to the research, it is these factors that can help to predict which candidates will perform effectively, derive satisfaction from what they do and become engaged. McGee (2006) purports that taking time to screen applicants for 'engagement readiness' will yield a far greater return in the medium term than hiring solely for skills and knowledge. It is worth noting the Schmidt (2004) model (figure 4.3) highlighted that recruiting the 'right' workforce is a requisite foundation to achieving outcomes further up in the model. However, the literature and future research could perhaps be more focused on exploring the links between aspects of the recruitment process and levels of engagement in organisations.

Measurement among existing employees

6.5 Clearly there is an onus on the organisation to retain key staff once they are recruited. Chapter 4 discussed the role of the organisation in effecting improvements in levels of engagement and discussed the type of actions organisations can take to encourage engagement. Ellis and Sorenson (2007) highlight that the first step in improving employee engagement is to adopt a definition and assess current levels of employee engagement. In order to help identify whether the organisation has an engagement problem, they suggest a diagnostic checklist in which a positive answer to any of the following example statements indicates that engagement levels could be improved upon in the organisation:

  • People often come to meetings and nod in agreement but limited to no progress is made.
  • Superior performance is often undefined, unrecognised and/or unrewarded.
  • There is a lack of information sharing across business units, and a lack of collaboration toward common goals and results.
  • Employees feel far removed from the results of the business and have little understanding of how they can contribute towards the strategy.
  • People feel disconnected from the organisation's customers.

6.6 Once it is identified that an engagement problem exists, the next step is to quantify the extent of engagement in the organisation and the amount and types of action required. It is important to identify how engagement levels among the existing staff body can be measured. In the literature, this usually takes the form of some sort of qualitative assessment across a range of factors, usually in the form of a staff survey. This section discusses several survey designs as found in the literature and makes an assessment of the key areas which form the basis for benchmarking and measuring employee engagement.

Employee Surveys

6.7 CIPD (2007a) notes that the first step towards building an engaged workforce is to get a measure of employee attitudes, and that most large employers in the private and public sector conduct regular employee attitude surveys. These can then be used to identify areas in need of improvement.

6.8 Robinson et al (2004) notes that trying to get a measure of engagement is 'challenging', given the range of complex factors being assessed. The report notes the use of the attitude survey as a useful tool for collecting, measuring and analysing employee opinions. The report also notes the 'bluntness' of the survey tool, given the range and nuances of opinions. However, in assessing engagement levels within the NHS, Robinson et al (2004) developed a survey comprising of 12 'engagement statements':

  • I speak highly of this organisation to my friends
  • I would be happy for my friends and family to use this organisation's products/services
  • This organisation is known as a good employer
  • This organisation has a good reputation generally
  • I am proud to tell others I am part of this organisation
  • This organisation really inspires the very best in me in the way of job performance
  • I find that my values and the organisation's are very similar
  • I always do more than is actually required
  • I try to help others in this organisation whenever I can
  • I try to keep abreast of current developments in my area
  • I volunteer to do things outside my job that contribute to the organisation's objectives
  • I frequently make suggestions to improve the work of my team/department/service

6.9 Robinson et al (2004) then tested the extent to which it would be valid to combine all 12 statements into a single engagement measure, with statistically encouraging results, which enabled Robinson et al to analyse engagement levels using an indicator that comprised all 12 statements. Robinson et al (2004) highlights that while this type of survey is useful in identifying levels of engagement across an organisation, its real value lies in comparing one group within the organisation to another, and measuring trends across time.

6.10 The case study discussed below demonstrates another important use of an engagement survey - identifying the strengths on which the organisation can build, as well as the sources of friction within an organisation, which can then be addressed.

B&Q - Good practice case study7

Profile: Europe's largest home improvement retailer. UK employment growth doubled from 17,500 in 2000 to 35,000 by 2003.

Approach: Since 2000, B&Q has used a 12-question survey developed by Gallup, on seven occasions to measure employee engagement - defined by the degree to which workers are emotionally committed to their jobs. Employees respond to each of the 12 questions on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) on a range of topics related to employee needs in the workplace such as friendships, pay, benefits, progress reports, and job related growth opportunities. High scores reflect engaged employees whose needs are being met and who are fully engaged in improving workplace productivity. Middle of the range scores reflect workers who are not engaged, whilst low scores imply active disengagement - those employees whose needs are not being met and who can actually discourage productivity.

However, the survey does not merely gauge prevailing workplace sentiment, rather it is designed to be a tool for action and strategy development. The survey asks about aspects of engagement that can be influenced by supervisors, such as recognition and communication. Thus depending on the outcome, managers can either plan how to exploit their strengths and/or address the weaknesses.

Further, the survey is designed to translate the 'softer' aspects of workplace emotions and behaviours into a hard measure of engagement, which in turn can be linked to organisational outcomes.

Impact: The use of the Gallup survey at B&Q over 7 separate occasions has allowed the company to build up a wealth of knowledge about what drives engagement within the company and how engagement levels link to greater productivity, better customer engagement and higher profits. The results of surveys have been taken forward into actions to improve scores. Earlier surveys revealed that company-wide, scores were fairly low, prompting management and employees alike to change their attitudes in order to improve engagement. For example, one store scored particularly low on the question 'At work do my opinions seem to count?' Managers changed the agenda of meetings to ask staff if they had issues to raise, and required managers to feed back subsequently on how the issue was being addressed.

Thus the use of the survey here highlights how an issue can be identified, and how actions can be taken to create the environment to enable the issue to be resolved.

B&Q customer surveys reveal that stores that score highly in the engagement survey also score higher on customer satisfaction. Translating this into organisational outcomes, the stores in the top half of customer loyalty generated £3.4m more in sales each year than stores in the bottom half.

6.11 Towers Perrin (2003) presents a range of engagement statements, many of which have elements common to the Robinson et al framework, including pride in being part of the organisation, advocacy about the products and services of the organisation, being inspired by the organisation to produce one's best work, and willingness to put in effort above and beyond normal expectations. The full list of the Towers Perrin engagement statements is provided below:

  • I really care about the future of my company
  • I am proud to work for my company
  • I have a sense of personal accomplishment from my job
  • I would say my company is a good place to work
  • The company inspires me to do my best work
  • I understand how my unit/department contributes to company success
  • I understand how my role relates to company goals and objectives
  • I am personally motivated to help my company succeed
  • I am willing to put in a great deal of effort beyond what is normally expected

6.12 Based on use of these statements, Towers Perrin (2003) found that just 17% of respondents are 'highly engaged' whilst 19% were found to be 'disengaged. The remaining middle are considered to be the 'moderately engaged'.

Measuring different types of engagement

6.13 In their employee attitude and engagement survey, CIPD (2006c) measured overall engagement but also outline that their research suggests that engagement has three components:

  • Cognitive engagement - focusing very hard on work, thinking about very little else during the working day;
  • Emotional engagement - being involved emotionally with your work; and
  • Physical engagement - being willing to 'go the extra mile' for your employer and work over and beyond contract.

Although CIPD (2006c) does not place emphasis or importance on any one component of engagement, the breakdown provides us with an interesting analysis and classification of the types of behaviours that feed into engagement and how these impact on the overall engagement levels, as discussed below.

6.14 In measuring cognitive engagement the following four statements were put to surveyed employees, who were asked to either agree or disagree with the statements:

  • Time passes quickly when I perform my job
  • I often think about other things when performing my job
  • I am rarely distracted when performing my job
  • Performing my job is so absorbing that I forget about everything else

6.15 In the CIPD (2006c) survey, only 31% of respondents were found to be cognitively engaged, and 22% disengaged, implying that this is an area that requires the most work by organisations to achieve engagement.

6.16 Regarding emotional engagement, the following statements were put to employees:

  • My own feelings are affected by how well I perform my job
  • I really put my heart into my job
  • I get excited when I perform well in my job
  • I often feel emotionally detached from the job

6.17 CIPD (2006c) found that levels of emotional engagement are higher than for the other two forms of engagement, with 58% of people reportedly emotionally engaged with their work and only 6% are emotionally disengaged. CIPD (2006c) highlights that effective individual and organisational management of the relationships and processes that increase positive emotions can also raise levels of overall engagement and performance.

6.18 As regards physical engagement, the CIPD (2006c) asked:

  • I stay until the job is done
  • I exert a lot of energy performing my job
  • I take work home to do
  • I avoid working overtime whenever possible
  • I avoid working too hard.

6.19 According to the CIPD (2006c) results, 38% of employees are physically engaged with their work, whilst 11% are physically disengaged. It is clear that some of these elements of the survey of each type of engagement capture the 'going the extra mile' element of engagement, and some of these may not be viewed as positives ( i.e. taking work home, working overtime).

6.20 As mentioned above, the real value of surveys lies in the extent to which the results are taken forward and actioned. The case study below of how Royal Bank of Scotland ( RBS) uses its 'human capital information' is put forward as an example of good practice in this regard.

RBS - How a major corporation uses its employee data - Good practice case study8

Profile: The Royal Bank of Scotland Group ( RBS) has over 140,000 employees in 30 countries.

Approach: RBS has recognised that in an organisation of its size, understanding the effectiveness of its people strategy and 'employee proposition' is a strategic imperative. From 2003, RBS developed a human capital strategy that provides its leaders with a detailed understanding of how effective the group is at attracting, engaging and retaining the best people.

RBS has adopted a human capital 'toolkit' which includes diagnostic tools, benchmarking resources and employee research and measurement tools.

RBS employs the use of comprehensive surveys which benchmark performance and report on a variety of topics such as absence, turnover and diversity. However, the key to the human capital strategy is its annual survey of employee attitudes delivered to all 140,000 staff. The results are communicated around the organisation and managers are provided with an action plan so that at a local level, tangible actions are agreed and targeted.

" This is a sophisticated, business-focused strategy within which employee attitude surveys play a key role" (Aitken 2006 cited in CIPD (2006a))

Impact: RBS publishes its human capital measures in its annual accounts and in its corporate responsibility report. As Aitken highlights " By reporting how our people strategy drives business performance, we differentiate RBS Group as a great company to work for, invest with and bank with. Sharing our approach to developing a highly rewarding and productive workplace is a key part of this approach".

Implications for managers: Employee attitude surveys are a fundamental component of sophisticated strategies for managing human capital. Findings on employee engagement can be used to monitor performance, communication, diversity, leadership and work-life balance. Combining attitudinal data with other indicators in the organisation can provide managers with a greater understanding of the relationship between HR policies and practices and organisational performance.

Monitoring engagement

6.21 Much of the literature emphasises the use of surveys (as discussed previously) on an ongoing basis as a method to monitor engagement over time. However there are several other tools for monitoring engagement that are highlighted in the literature, for example focus groups (Cambridge County Council - see case study), a 'human capital toolkit' (Royal Bank of Scotland - see case study), panels and employee suggestions (Rotherham MBC - see case study) and monitoring online feedback (Moorcroft (2006) on Royal Bank of Canada).

6.22 However, what is missing from the literature is a discussion of an explicit monitoring framework detailing how changes in engagement can be measured, and how progression along a spectrum of engagement might be quantified. Although some of the literature places employees into categories of 'engaged' or 'disengaged,' or 'highly' or 'moderately' engaged, there is a lack of detail in the literature about monitoring progress in the literature and quantifying the steps between disengagement and engagement, for example.

Summary and key findings

6.23 Our discussions earlier highlighted the importance of employee engagement, in terms of organisational performance, as well as on the outcomes for customers (of organisations in either the private or public sector), employee turnover, departmental climate and external advocacy of the organisation. Getting a measure of the extent of engagement and disengagement in an organisation is therefore of utmost importance in gauging the underlying causes of sub-optimal organisational performance.

6.24 It was discussed how the propensity for engagement during employment can be identified at the recruitment stage and several articles noted the importance of recruiting not only for ability, but for attitude and alignment with the organisation's values.

6.25 It was also noted that the literature presents a diagnostic checklist (see paragraph 6.5) and the areas to be aware of in identifying whether an organisation or a department has an engagement problem. Such warning signs include good performance going unrecognised and/or unrewarded, meetings that do not result in actions, and staff feeling distanced from the organisation and its objectives.

6.26 It is identified throughout the literature that employee surveys are a key starting point for measuring engagement levels. A range of different factors are included in each of the surveys found in the literature, but some common themes include:

  • The level of pride in the organisation;
  • Advocacy about the organisation as a place to work as well as about its products and services;
  • The extent to which the organisation inspires the best work from employees; and
  • The extent to which employees are motivated to put in effort above and beyond the call of duty.

6.27 It was also highlighted how organisations can identify different types of engagement - for example through the CIPD classification of cognitive, emotional and physical engagement.

6.28 Several case studies were identified to illustrate that the true value of engagement surveys lies in how they are used by senior management to identify strengths and weaknesses, which are subsequently addressed.

6.29 However, the literature was weak on how specific monitoring frameworks could be designed and used.

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Page updated: Wednesday, May 9, 2007