The one BIG idea for Employee Engagement in 2016!

Looking for one transformational idea for Employee Engagement in 2016? kfit: the Employee Health and Wellness platform from Kwench might be just what you are looking for!

I have always dreaded the last week of December. Christmas and New Year get-together and cake eating binges aside, there is always the dreaded mental review of another year gone by.

Ever since I landed up on the wrong side of 30, “Loose Weight” and “Exercise Regularly” have been on top or near top of my New Year Resolutions list and are always the items with a red cross against them in my year-end review. And somewhere along the year I would have inevitably invested in exercise gear that cost way more than I could afford, gym memberships that cost even more than the above mentioned exercise gear, and last year even a high-end water-proof watch – you know, for when I do the 25 laps in the pool. Several consecutive years of this pattern, and tens of thousands of Rupees later – I was fed up.

So I did what was seemed most obvious thing to do – I headed to the café and discussed my problem with others! (With a large latte and a chocolate donut on the side). Now what is interesting is that the story seemed to be pretty common across people I talked to. With all the stresses of just barely balancing daily work and family life, exercise and diet more often than not takes a back seat. Even drinking adequate amounts of water can be a challenge and the sugar in all the cups of coffee reflects pretty quickly on the waistline – if not worse! My colleagues at Kwench pretty much confirmed the challenges and so did a lot of our friends, family and even clients to whom we posed the question.

There is no doubt about it. The more we asked around the more it seemed that India Inc. has a serious health problem. We dug around for some data and this is what we found.

 

Employee_Health_Stats_

 

Scared?

Well that’s just one part of the problem. You see from an organizational perspective, there is a lot at stake when the wellbeing of its workforce is not quite up to the mark. Loss of productivity due to more sick days, absenteeism and worse presenteeism.

If there is so much at stake for both the employee and the employer, why don’t Workplace Wellness programs work? Research on enterprise wellness programs by Guidespark reveals the top reasons why these programs don’t achieve the required results. While ~70% of employees feel that wellness is important, less than 10% actually take full advantage of such programs. Employees don’t participate or the end results are not as expected because they are too busy with work, the programs don’t suit their lifestyle or that they are not fully aware of what is on offer. Almost half of them felt that their biggest wellness challenge was insufficient activity followed by stress and poor nutrition.

Clearly any wellness initiative that hopes to succeed in the workplace must have a solution to all if not most of these issues.

One of the really cool things of working at Kwench is that problems are not left unattended for too long. Anything that touches on Employee Engagement obviously piques our interest. And if we think we can use technology to fix that problem them it excites us to no end.

We took the problem, pondered over it, did our homework, drew the sketches, put the engineers and designers into one big room to do their magic and created kfit – a comprehensive employee health and wellness platform that leverages the magic of social, gamification and mobility to help companies raise the health quotient of their workforce. kfit uses micro interventions coupled with technology to bring about positive and long lasting behavioral change.

Excited? We sure hope so, because we are very excited about the possibilities this platform holds in transforming the health and wellness landscape of Corporate India.

If you are looking for one BIG idea for your Employee Engagement program for 2016, then look no further.

If you want us to get in touch and explain more about how kfit can help transform your company’s wellness, please send us an enquiry.

If you want to know more, here is a quick guide to why this is the one BIG Idea, that you can download and it is titled (Surprise, Surprise): The One BIG Idea for Employee Engagement in 2016!

kfit_eBook_Image_1_

 

Oh and I am glad to say this year I won’t be putting a cross against “Loose Weight” and “Exercise Regularly” on my resolution list from Jan ’15.

2016 promises to be a whole new year – in more ways than one! Join us in changing the world – one step at a time!

PS: Reminder – Get in touch with us and we will be glad to talk about Employee Engagement Ideas for 2016!

 

Employee Alignment-Zone: “The Time Element”

The Architect – Precisely. As you are undoubtedly gathering, the anomaly is systemic, creating fluctuations in even the most simplistic equations.

 Neo – Choice. The problem is choice. (Matrix Reloaded, 2003)

On this blog and in quite a few conversations, I have pointed out the risks of overtly relying on cohorts or grouping of employees to formulate an employee engagement strategy. Using segments and cohorts to understand broad behavior and drivers of engagement is okay, but trying to engage the individual based only on those conclusions is not the best approach.

As ‘Neo’ puts it in the movie Matrix Reloaded , the ‘problem’ is Choice or to be more accurate, in this case – individuality. Every employee is an individual with her own priorities, preferences, fears and responsibilities.

ZoneOfAlignment_

Work, forms an important part of an employees life – and the emphasis I place is on ‘part’ and not on ‘important’ because that aspect is the one that often gets missed out when employee engagement strategies or initiatives are designed. As an individual with family, friends, interests, hobbies, ambitions and aspirations – responsibilities at work represent just a fraction of the things that matter to the employee.

There are a bunch of things that are important to the employee (health, financial well being, spending time with family, a social life, learning new things, new experiences) and there are things are important to the organization (employee well being, profits, playing an important role in the society, innovation).

When an employee is at work, he is operating in the intersection of these two spheres – there are things that matter to him which align with what matters to the organization. When this overlap is driven by the correct factors (alignment on the larger picture, the direction the company is taking, quality of work, the work culture etc.), there is a zone of alignment that is sustaining (and empowering).

ZoneofDisillusionment_

When what matters to the organization (as perceived by the employee) starts to drift away from what matters to the employee as an individual, this overlap reduces, the zone of alignment starts to shrink and becomes unsustainable. This is when disillusionment sets in eventually leading to Disengagement if corrective measures are not taken.

GapOfDisengagement_

Too much of something:

The logical question that follows is what when there is perfect alignment – shouldn’t that be the ideal state? To borrow (somewhat incorrectly) from that age-old adage, “Too much of anything isn’t good for you”

A situation where an individual is completely (and only) aligned with what matters for the organization makes him dysfunctional in other things that should matter to him. If the last line reminds you of the uptight, always-on-the-edge, hard driving, ranting and screaming executive, you are bang-on.

ThePuppetZone_

The other (unintended) consequence of such a situation is that individual then subsumes his discretion to what seems best for the organization. Being too focused on one aspect inevitably leads to a myopic vision of what is correct. It is the healthy balance of all aspects in ones life that helps drive a balanced approach towards challenges – both personal and at work.

A ‘super-mom’ I know uses negotiation skills learnt at work with her 1-year-old infant (works most of the time) and then takes the lessons learnt from handling the concerns of parents, her husband, siblings back to work to engage with her multi-generational team. Imagine what would happen if she tried a time-sheet driven approach with her infant or never took time out to spend time with her parents or spouse but focused only fixing “issues” at work (of which there never seems to be any dearth).

 

The Time Element:

Unlike organizations, what ‘matters’ to an individual is in a state of flux. I am not talking of value systems, or ambitions – those are (hopefully) rather fixed. I am referring to the drivers of what is a priority. Companies and Institutions have stated goals at time of creation and (usually) those drive everything they do. People on the other hand have changing preferences and changing events and these affect the overlap and consequently the alignment they have with the organization.

TheTimeElement_

If the organization stays rigid on how it interacts with the employee, then the extent of alignment is bound to change. Again an increased degree of alignment is not necessarily a good thing.

A few years ago I got chatting with a senior executive at a party. He was really good what he did, and totally disengaged. He was so efficient at what he did that the organization was reluctant to consider what his own personal aspirations were and had kept him doing the same thing for years on end. “The Gap of Disengagement” was very clear and he was looking to quit because he realized that by staying on he was damaging himself and the organization through his disengagement. I ran into him two years later in a busy airport and was surprised that he was still with the same organization in the same role. When I quizzed him, he confessed that he was still disillusioned but a personal crisis had made it impossible for him to look for other possibilities. His efficiency gave him more time at home and so he compromised his ambitions to stay on with his employer. The executive’s alignment with his employer had increased, but it was driven purely by convenience.

Smart organizations would avoid this situation by being aware of various dimensions of what drives each employee. DIY Pulse surveys are a good way; Managers who listen to their team members and do something about their concerns are even better.

A static employee engagement program is not enough neither is a “one-size-fits-all” approach. Like ‘generically designed’ antibiotics can have unexpected nasty side-effects in patients, employee engagement strategies designed for ‘masses’, ‘cohorts’ or ‘segments’ can induce the reverse effect. The pharmaceutical industry has woken up to the importance of pharmacogenomics to counter the ill effects of ‘universal-design’ for medicines – its time for HR professionals to follow suit.

Acknowledgements: 

Post title inspired by the Twilight Zone series (1958)

126 Slides

250px-Yin_and_Yang.svgThis has been around for some time now (5mn+ views) and has been much praised (Sheryl Sandberg has called it one of the most important documents ever to come out of Silicon Valley)

No jazz. No sounds. No animation.

Just 126 Slides on how Netflix transformed itself by a no-nonsense walk-the-talk approach to building an amazing culture and nurturing talent.

Understated. Mostly common sense. No claims of “thought-leadership”. If you haven’t seen the deck, drop everything and see it now!

Annual Performance Reviews – All Noise, No Signal

Performance_Review_Back in university when I was busy studying communication theory, the one thing we obsessed over was the SNR or Signal-to-Noise ratio.

The professor in charge of teaching us the nuances of what was quite a difficult topic, used to rate the pop-quizzes he gave us on a range of zero to one in increments of 0.1. He gave one to answers that got to the point correctly with little or no fluff (‘Maximum Signal and little noise’ as the prof said) and zero to those that beat around the bush and got no where in particular (‘All Noise, No Signal’). Most of us, unsurprisingly, clustered around 0.5.

Years later, I ran into my professor again. Now retired, he was more chatty that he ever was in the classroom and we got reminiscing about those much dreaded pop-quizzes. “I have a confession,” he said, laughing out loud, “there was far too much garbage for me to read through in those answer sheets you guys handed in. Very little Signal and lots of noise I used to actually read only a very few, and then just handed out those marks based on what I expected the student to write. And since nobody ever challenged me, and I got the bell curve of grades fitted out perfectly, it worked out just fine.” My jaw dropped! I spent years thinking I was just hopeless and didn’t really get antenna theory and radio signal propagation. I couldn’t have imagined that the forced bell-curve fitting would affect me even as a young student.

Anyway, coming back to the present day. Yet another ‘financial’ year is coming to an end, and very soon HR teams in most organizations will get busy preparing for that annual carnival called ‘Performance Reviews.’

Here’s what typically happens:

HR gives managers over a month to finish appraisals for their teams and sends multiple reminders. On paper there seems to be enough time to finish the process. With several other priorities vying for the manager’s time, appraisals gets pushed to the back of the list everyday and nobody ever gets around to spending the planned few hours with every employee.

So now, on the last day before the badly-designed, overtly-complicated HRM software with a few dozen fields to be filled, closes the appraisal process, the HR team resorts to hounding managers to finish appraisals before the deadline. ‘Do it or face the wrath of the Corporate Office’ the HR head threatens, out of desperation when he sees the dismal percentage of teams that have completed the process.

The naked threat works, with hours to go, all client work comes to grinding halt and team-members and managers reluctantly get down to the task of completing their appraisals. The manager now has to evaluate thirty odd people in a few hours, pulls out the goal sheet setup an year ago, he goes “Hmm….lets see now…” And soon its out with data and in with the subjective, the bias and the perceptions. (There’s that bell-curve to comply with.)

Understandably most employees see this as a futile exercise since its is very rare that tasks and goals laid out a year ago would be relevant now. Chances are very high that the employee actually worked on something very different at several points along the way, doused a few dozen crisis situations during the year, came up with a couple of innovative ideas that may or may not have been implemented, put in hundreds of hours of overtime to make up for inefficiencies or just plain bad planning. And in the few minutes he has with the manager while being ‘appraised’, the employee feels threatened. He has to secure his next year’s pay based on what transpires in the next few minutes.

Annual performance reviews are a mind-numbing exercise that most employees in the corporate world go through each year. And mind-numbing is apt! Research has shown that when a person is threatened, activity diminishes in certain parts of the brain. David Rock, author of “Your Brain at Work” says when that happens, “people’s fields of view actually constrict, they can take in a narrower stream of data, and there’s a restriction in creativity.”

Critical feedback doesn’t quite work the way its assumed:

Jena Mcgregor, in her recent article in The Washington Post, points to research by psychologists at Kansas State University, Eastern Kentucky University and Texas A&M University where they studied how people respond to critical feedback they receive in an appraisal of the work done in the year.

The assumption was that people who are motivated to learn things on their own would welcome the critical feedback and use it to improve their work. Apparently not!

The study was based on conclusions of a prior study which concluded that people aspire to reach their goals in one of the following three ways:

  1. They try to prove their competence at work and get positive feedback.
  2. They withdraw from tasks where they might fail and avoid negative feedback.
  3. Focus on the learning and developing of their skills.

Obviously people who fall into the first two categories, didn’t take kindly to negative feedback in their performance reviews. But to the surprise of the researchers even those with a strong learning focus didn’t quite like the negative feedback.

When one considers all the cost and effort that HR (and the entire organization) puts into the annual performance review process, it would almost seem an utter waste of all that time and money.

Here’s the wrap up of how the annual performance review process ‘performs’ :

  • Based on the research mentioned above, it seems that what is intended to be a constructive and helpful discussion quickly falls apart when the appraisees hear critical feedback. (Even for those who have a strong focus on learning)
  • In a previous article, Jena points out that Leadership advisory firm CEB’s research found that two-thirds of the employees who are rated as the firms top performers are in fact not.
  • CEB research shows that managers feel conventional reviews only generate a 3- to 5% improvement in employee performance.
  • Only 23% of the HR professionals surveyed by CEB for their research study felt that their review process was satisfactory.

All signs point to the futility of the once-a-year performance review and yet we continue to persist with the ‘established way’. Come April-May and management is shocked when the resignations come pouring in.

As I have said in a previous post on this blog, It’s time to move on!

References and Acknowledgements:

Study finds that basically every single person hates performance reviews, Jena McGregor, The Washington Post;

The corporate kabuki of performance reviews, Jena McGregor, The Washington Post

Your Brain at Work: Strategies for Overcoming Distraction, Regaining Focus, and Working Smarter All Day Long, David Rock, ISBN-13: 978-0061771293

Image courtesy of  FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Rewards that go boink! (or the folly of cash as an incentive)

Money_Trap_Mark Hanna:   The name of the game, move the money from your client’s pocket into your pocket.
Jordan Belfort:   But if you can make your clients money at the same time it’s advantageous to everyone, correct?
Mark Hanna:   No

(Dialogue from the movie ‘The Wolf of Wall Street’, 2013)

I have an article on how to ‘Engage the employee with the right reward’ up on People Matters where I continue to advocate the need for companies to find the right strategy towards rewarding their employees – doling out cash bonuses just doesn’t cut it.

This post however, is more about what I left out of that article (thanks to word-count limits and the need to stay focused on the theme). At the very beginning of the article I mention in passing how the financial collapse of 2008 exposed the flaw of a cash-bonus-linked-to-sales strategy. What I did not write about was the erosion of trust that the greed of a few caused. And lets fact it – this is true about any industry, not just banking. There are plenty of examples in other sectors like call-center employees cutting short or worse hanging up on customers, because their variable pay was linked to number of calls attended rather than issues successfully resolved, engineers using short-cuts to get automobile products out faster without adequate testing or known flaws leading to catastrophic failures or in some cases deaths.

The death spiral for the company arising out of perverse incentive structures is actually quite simple:

Wrong incentive structure -> Incorrect actions by employees -> Short term spike in sales/output->A select few get rich on commissions/bonus->Medium Term/Long Term problems come home to roost->Best case – the company/product brand takes a hit, Worst case company goes belly-up.

Jordan Belfort:   My name is Jordan Belfort. The year I turned 26 I made $49 million dollars which really pissed me off because it was 3 shy of a million a week. – (Dialogue from the movie ‘The Wolf on Wall Street’)

Pre-2008 some bankers just went (massively) overboard in pushing their banks hurtling down that spiral and got the whole industry in a mess since everybody ended up doing the same shenanigans to get massive bonus payouts.

Joseph Stiglitz in his excellent article ‘In No One We Trust’ talks in depth of this erosion of trust and says

“…We had created a system of rewards that encouraged short-sighted behavior and excessive risk-taking. In fact, we had entered an era in which moral values were given short shrift and trust itself was discounted.

… Bank managers and corporate executives search out creative accounting devices to make their enterprises look good in the short run, even if their long-run prospects are compromised.”

So do we take the money-is-root-of-all-evil approach and pay people in food coupons? No. Absolutely not, but neither can leadership of companies afford to take the ‘lazy’ route to establishing a rewards strategy but just resorting to cash payouts as a percentage of profit/sales/top-line. (Remember Enron anyone? Even as the company was imploding, its executives were rewarded with large bonuses for meeting specific revenue goals.) The problem here is not only the flawed rewards structure, but something much deeper. Something for which the whole organization exists in the first place – the very raison d’etre.

The real challenge for leadership in establishing a rewards strategy – goals:

Before you worry about ‘how to reward employees’, the greater challenge is in establishing ‘what’ you are rewarding them for. “Organizational Goals!” you say and full marks to you. Employees in an organization are working on their individual goals which eventually must meld together to achieve the organizational goal.  Employees at Enron were also being paid to achieve organizational goals but in hindsight it’s obvious those goals were all wrong!

Things can also go horribly wrong when impossible goals are set because, leaders shoot their mouth off or get visions of grandeur. Let’s take a short trip back in time. It’s the late 1960’s. The Ford Motor Company was fast losing ground to more fuel efficient cars the Japanese were cranking out. Lee Iacocca, a very smart man with lots of successful launches to his credit, (and the then CEO of Ford), announced the challenge of producing a new car that would weigh less than 2000 pounds and cost less than $2000 and would be available in the market in 1970. The result: skipped safety checks on the Ford Pinto that led to cars catching fire and eventually resulted in massive law suits.

 So we now realize that organizations have a more fundamental problem – with goal setting. That goal usually filters down from the top – which brings us to an interesting conundrum. Going back to what Stiglitz has to say in his article.

“So C.E.O.’s must be given stock options to induce them to work hard. I find this puzzling: If a firm pays someone $10 million to run a company, he should give his all to ensure its success. He shouldn’t do so only if he is promised a big chunk of any increase in the company’s stock market value…”

 Research has shown that the motivation that people will have to do the right thing or blow the whistle when things are not quite going the way they should is greatly enhanced when they feel they are working for a larger purpose than just monetary gain. When the only incentive one has is money, it tends to create the ‘stretch goal’ trap. Bigger goals – Bigger reward – Bigger bank balance! Forget everything else, all ‘that’ is somebody else’s problem. The ‘Big Whale’ trades, the LIBOR fixing scandal, the recent record fines paid by JP Morgan, Enron, the list just goes on and on.

“Of course, incentives are an important component of human behavior. But the incentive movement has made them into a sort of religion, blind to all the other factors — social ties, moral impulses, compassion — that influence our conduct.” (Stiglitz)

Setting the correct goals is thus fundamental to achieving the desired output from employees. Goals that are too narrow; are too many in number or have an inappropriate time horizon which eventually result in, higher risk taking and unethical behaviour by employees in an attempt to meet those goals.

So how do we set the right goals?

This, dear reader, is the trillion dollar question. The ultimate question of life, the universe and everything – the answer as we all know is 42! There we have it. Problem Solved. :)

With due apologies to Douglas Adams, there is no one correct answer for this. With incorrect incentives, the chances of the goals themselves being set wrongly go up exponentially. Add to that the fact that goals when applied to teams with have varied levels of challenge for its members.

In their Working Paper, ‘Goals gone wild’, Lisa D. Ordonez et al. point this out –

“Perverse incentives can also make goal setting politically and practically problematic. When reaching pre-set goals matters more than absolute performance, self-interested individuals can strategically set (or guide their managers to set) easy-to-meet goals. By lowering the bar, they procure valuable rewards and accolades. Many company executives often choose to manage expectations rather than maximize earnings. In some cases, managers set a combination of goals that, in aggregate, appears rational, but is in fact not constructive. For example, consider a self-interested CEO who receives a bonus for hitting targets. This CEO may set a mix of easy goals (that she is sure to meet) and ‘what the hell’ difficult goals (that she does not plan to meet). On average, the goal levels may seem appropriate, but this mix of goals may generously reward the CEO (when she meets the easy goals) without motivating any additional effort when the goals are difficult.”

Goal setting and the consequent rewards strategy are closely intertwined. Your rewards strategy might be well thought out, meaningful and beautifully executed but if they are being handed out for the wrong goals, it will still be meaningless in the long run. Rather than taking the easy way out of boiling the organizations goals down to the revenue numbers and profit figures of billions of dollars, its time leaders spent more time establishing meaningful goals that are aligned with the long term interest of the organization and all its share-holders.

The alternative of continuing with status-quo on goals and incentives is a scary proposition. Already there are rumblings of real estate and investment bubbles building up in South East Asian economies as a consequence of the Fed tapering. Another large financial shock just might be the proverbial last-straw on the camel’s back. On the positive side, we might get a few more entertaining movies.

References and acknowledgements for this post:

‘In no one we trust’, Joseph E. Stiglitz, NYTimes, 12 December 2013, Goals gone wild: The systematic side effects of Over-Prescribing Goal Setting, Lisa D. Ordonez and others, HBS Working Paper, 09-083, Image used in this post courtesy of Free Digital Photos.

Join the VLZ Webinar on ‘Leveraging Social Media for Employee Engagement’

VLZ_Jan2014_Mailer_v1_(3)Sign up for the 1st Virtual Learning Zone (VLZ) in 2014 where we will explore the topic of Leveraging Social  Media for Employee Engagement.

To register click here

The Speaker:

Anand PillaiAnand Pillai

Senior Vice President and Chief Learning Officer,

Reliance Industries Limited.

 

About the session:

In-house social platforms can help build new approaches to collaboration, co-creation, and act as a crucial tacit-knowledge attractor & collector. Organizations are increasingly using the secret sauce called “Social Media” in different ways to influence employee engagement and dramatically accelerate problem solving, productivity, and innovation.

Businesses bank on “good ideas” and it’s now within every business’s grasp to dramatically accelerate this process using social media. Good ideas will still originate from talented individuals, but now these ideas can be amplified and expanded with remarkable efficiency. Social Media should become a part of your “business as usual” – by employees becoming the voice of your brands – and that’s when you will say you have achieved optimum employee engagement!

Attendee seats are limited. Please register early. Registrations are on a first-come-first-serve basis and will be closed as soon as all the slots are filled.

To register click here

or paste the following URL into your browser:

https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/9049772700532392705

Webinar ID: 153-194-035