Our friend, Leigh Branham, suggested that I set up an automated "Google Alert" on employee engagement so that I could be updated with the latest blog posts, book reviews, corporate trends, and other insights related to this subject.

One post, distributed yesterday, took a contrarian view to the attention being paid to this subject, suggesting, among other things, that there's nothing new here and that we've simply invented a new word for an old workplace issue (they attributed the term to the Gallup Organization).

Almost aloud, I thought to myself - "REALLY?" Could something we're working so hard to address simply be a rehash of issues leaders have been working to address for decades? more...

There's a great deal of chatter about how employee engagement impacts an organization - through retention, through turnover, productivity, and the bottom line.

However, while you might have an employee engagement dashboard driven by recurring surveys, it's more likely that you don't. Yet, there are other indicators that you may be watching and that could generate "tell-tale" engagement signs. more...

The 7:10 AM phone call began..."Steve, I have tragic news...."

Our company lost an employee two days ago and the first notification set about a flurry of activity appropriate to the circumstances.
more...

I am fortunate to work for a company who believes what LL believes. We are a federal contractor with an incredibly transient workforce - one that is likely to change employers every year as the organization who "owns the contract" changes while the person "doing the work" remains where they are.

As a more precise example, I have one employee who has worked the same day-to-day task/job for the past four years, but who has drawn his paycheck from four different companies.

I know that, at the start of every day, my job is more about engaging them to our organization than it is to their jobs...they're seasoned professionals who, in the majority, do a terrific job. But...I'm just the latest employer in a series providing income. I'm a tool. Therefore, rather than assuming an engaged workforce only to be shown differently in time, I approach every day, every interaction, from the perspective that they aren't engaged with our company.

How differently might you act if you reversed the common assumption and launched every day from the perspective that you're starting from zero with employee engagement?
more...

As we close out the past year, and look forward with optimism to a new year, what is most important to you and to your organization in 2011?  

As I look back on the last 12 months, there are definitely some things that stand out when it comes to creating and sustaining successful teams.  Over the course of dozens of CEO events across the country, perhaps one of the most prevalent frustrations I heard from top executives was the lack of accountability that they felt existed within their organizations.  But when  asked why that was, there was a general consensus that their people either don't have adequate self-accountability, or that their managers aren't 'holding people accountable'.  

I believe that this is a potential recipe for disaster!

In high performance teams, accountability is not something that is done TO people, it is the natural result of a process of working WITH people.  Very simply, if we can establish trust within our teams (through the demonstration of empathy, humility and authenticity) we cannot help but inspire connectivity and commitment to the vision, the team, and each other.  And once we have the commitment of our people to accomplish our purpose, they will hold themselves accountable.  They will not want to let you, or their team down.  

If we try to start "holding others accountable", the natural human inclination is to resist.  Nobody wants something done TO them.  In those situations, it is no wonder that accountability takes on a totally negative connotation, and why results are fleeting, if at all.  As long as someone is looking over their shoulder, they may perform to the prescribed standard, but not one bit further.  Conversely, in teams that have built their foundations on trust, and the resultant commitment that is created, accountability is a natural byproduct that doesn't even have to be directly addressed.  It just happens!

So if your desire to change outcomes, or increase performance results in the next year, I would strongly suggest close consideration to beginning the year by examining the level of trust that exists between and amongst your team.  As always, If I or any of our faculty can help with that process, please don't hesitate to let us know!

Happy New year to all!

Rob Nielsen

This is a question that probably has more to do with corporate culture than it does with personal satisfaction. Sure, there is that time when you received your first promotion and you took a stack of business cards home to your mother. But that aside, the issue of what people are called in your organization tells others something about how you position and market your company.

Some companies are traditional in their approach to job titles. Their employees are Manager of this-or-that, Director of something or Vice President of whatever.

Other organizations don’t seem to value titles much at all. Case in point: banks. In every bank branch I’ve ever walked into it seems like everyone that works there is a vice president (aside from the tellers).

And others still, are very creative. Examples include Chief People Officer, Director of Human Possibilities, Director of First Impressions, and Director of Interplanetary Relations (when this creative director for an ad agency in Austin, TX was asked what his job title meant, his response was “You’ll know when the ships arrive!”).

From my perspective, however, job titles probably cause more negative feelings amongst our employees than they are worth. Their nature is anti-team – causing employees to feel badly about themselves and others in the company when someone else receives the job title they thought they should have received. They generate a notion of inequality (i.e., power distance) between team members, which in my opinion, can lead to social loafing (i.e., deferring action and decisions to their “superiors”).

If our goal as leaders is to create “unstoppable organizations” and maximize creativity and productivity, then these types of behaviors are counter-productive.

And if you believe, as I do, that words matter, are we really contributing positively to our bottom-line by awarding job titles?