For all practical purposes, employee engagement is not a
matter of persuasion per se. It is anything but this.
The overarching tendency to look at employee engagement as a
one-way street, in which employees are actively engaged, is a reflection of
a fossilized mindset. In effect, the levers of power and control are
vested in the hands of the people firmly perched on the higher echelons
of the organization and the people way down the hierarchy are expected
to act in deference to the diktats of higher-ups. Needless to say,
engagement in such contexts is a mere ruse to bring around employees, while
in the same vein, engendering a mirage that the choice completely
rests upon their collective shoulders. However, such views do not
hold water anymore. The reason is not far to seek. In the last decade,
everything about the people, their character, composition, attitudes
and expectations have undergone a sea change. The prototypical
employee of yore—the one who is loyal, committed, compliant and obedient
has rather morphed into the restive, aggressive, demanding,
discerning, highly mobile and less deferential one. Employees cannot be
fooled anymore. They are smart, suave, and savvy. They have unlimited
access to information than ever before. Today, employees are very
articulate and want to be heard.
Through the 1980 and 1990, the HR managers created a robust
internal communication system to generate employee loyalty.
However, the very premise of fostering employee loyalty is patently wrong
and most vulnerable. Seldom do HR managers realize that loyalty is
a two-way street. In spite of mouthing platitudes about employee
loyalty, many employers embraced `slash and burn', and
downsizing with gay abandon and frittered away the trust reposed by the
employees in them. In the recent years, HR managers have conveniently
jettisoned the idea of organizational loyalty and had affaire de coeur
with internal branding for a brief while. Of late, HR practitioners have
discovered the virtues of employee engagement, a term that has
virtually become the new HR speak. Admittedly, engagement is a
two-way street. Though organizations are stepping up their efforts to see
that its people are actively engaged, the immediate question that begs
an answer is—how profoundly the organization is engaged with its
own people? HR managers should realize that unless the organization
gets engaged with its employees and takes care of their interest,
engagement per se will remain an illusory concept. Employee engagement
may sound more like a proverbial curate's egg. HR managers would do well
to reflect on the aphorism: "Engagement can always be volunteered,
but cannot be conscripted". If engagement were to be a
voluntary thingummy, a great level of trust will have to pervade the organization.
It may sound hackneyed, but the trust always emanates from the sense
of being seen and heard. Seen in this background, storytelling as a
strong engagement tool, has assumed greater importance. |
