We often hear about employee disengagement in organizations. With this new "silent killer", employees could find themselves isolated, demotivated and uncommitted to their workplace obligations. Among the reasons could include lack of engagement between management and staff, no sharing of future company direction or lack of employer-employee respect. Employees could be told to only focus on their deliverables.
Could this be considered as among the leading disease in the 21st century? How and why does this occur? I would like to invite you to share some your recent experiences (not less than 3 years) so that we could understand employee disengagement better.
yes I do agree with you, This can be a growing disease ....
The most Important factor is dissatisfaction..may be with the Job or with Management.. work life balance can also be another reason..
check this link ..
http://stephenjgill.typepad.com/performance_improvement_b/2011/12/20-signs-of-employee-disengagement.html
The cause for the employee disengagement for a fresher at work and an experienced employee stems from myriad/boundless factors. The workforce jerks, omnipresent in today’s work environment can cause the organisation to bleed internally. Matrix reporting structure, which is a trend in many organisations, leads to gap in expected deliverables, among the employee and the managers. This in turn cascades to the employee’s failed morale and triggers disengagement of varied forms. Favouritism at workplace is the order of the day, which may arise due to regionalism, cultural background, alumni from the same alma mater etc . Lack of appreciative inquiry by the management, appraisal based on “Halo Effect”, proximity to the strategic /top level management, denial of onsite opportunities to the deserving employee etc... The list seems to be incessant.
Thank you for your comments. It has been insightful. Could I suggest that employee disengagement could be accepted as normal and as part of workplace culture?
Even if we are in western or non-western socities, the method of communication/engagement in the past for example, by instruction could the reason why there is more instruction in workplace now and hence, the lack of engagement.
Employee disengagement may also occur because of lack of appreciation, on the part of management, for good work done by the employee. Favoritism, lack of financial incentives, lack of empathy, lack of motivation, maybe work place problems may also be responsible.
I think factors fostering disengagement among employess should be taken seriously. Disengagement is a natural process in the organization as no body can be always engaged. So one has to be careful about the factors which make employees deviate from enagagement to disengagement.
Dr Konapala Viswesweswa ra rao GVP College of Engg for Women Visakhapatnam
I think,generally the employee disengagement due to lack of proper knowledge about the work or employer is unable to provide optimum level of required resources is one of the reason .secondly the employees intentionally enquiringly about the other employee's work-wise ,worth-wise duties-wise and other unnecessary issues are to be taken seriously instead of their responsibility. Finally these employees intentionally the create disengagement at the same time complaint against others due this unhealthy climate leads to disengagement of employees in the organization.
I totally agree with you. In my view, this disease is common especially in big organizations where most supervisors have a wide span of control which they cannot adequately monitor. I am also of the opinion that there is no one best solution to this disease but a combination of different performance management strategies. I deliberately emphasis performance management because it demands, among other things, continuous assessment of how well individuals are performing. I believe that behavioral change takes time and it demands continuous assessment and taking corrective action. It is, therefore, imperative for supervisors at different levels to have adequate skills in performance management.
In every organization, there are people who are high performers,people who bear the bulk of organizational work load and people who are so called disengaged. Management need to do in-depth analysis for employee disengagement which may be due to: wrong deployment, lack of motivation, perceived communication gap, lack of transparency, lack of concern for employee development etc. This may eventually result in high attrition rate and may affect organizational performance. I feel, there should be a systemic approach towards handling this problem, and as a first step, feeling of mutual trust is required to be established between management and identified disengaged employees. The trust may be established through: communication, transparency, recognition and value based decision making throughout the organization and thereafter one to one interaction will help in finding out the solution which may vary from person to person..
Could disengagement be considered as non-normal in organizations? If disengagement leads to absence/decrease in innovation and performance, why does remedial action come only when disengagement exist? Could this be due to our reactive mindset? Could the attention of supervisors and top management be somewhere else such as profits, output that they are unaware that disengagement has started and is continuing to thrive?
While driving a vehicle there are three basics ABC. Although they are placed in alphabetical order in the dictionary, they are in reverse order in driving. Press the clutch, engage the gear, release the brakes and apply the accelerator. In order to gain the maximum rpm, 0 – 60 in 10 seconds, would you forget the clutch and press only the accelerator? If you do, what will happen? The same thing is true with the TEAM. While expecting the maximum profit (speed), you press on deliverables (accelerator) and forget to use the clutch (motivation) and the brakes (quality time with the team to share the purpose). Isn’t it foolish to expect the vehicle to move forward in synch while forgetting the driving basics?
Disengagement is nothing but apathy that breeds in absence of empathy and empathy is nothing but sharing...! If the top management is all busy with the numbers and absolutely reluctant to share the essence of the journey with the team, the TEAM would be nothing but a gear lever hanging around waiting for the clutch to engage it in position. Driving an enthusiastic and efficient TEAM is not different than driving a vehicle with learning your basics right! And if you look at it little insightfully, only gear lever is the part you extend your hand to, rest all is 'legwork'...!
Disengagement is a disease in developing countries. Promotion based on seniority system helps employees to move at the higher level while they do not have adequate capacity. Placement without employees consultation kills the spirit of work. Organizational culture of bias and unfairness makes employees silent and just to work what comes to their table. Some they do not work because they are not given adequate recognition by the management. Some are real disengagement position because of the change in the technology. Before we use type witter to work with, now we have computers. Employees hired 25 years ago without computer knowledge are mostly non performers now, if they have not enhanced their skills. The organizational system, the work environment and the leadership play a crucial roles in creating and managing disengagement.
If the disengagement continues, could employees be disillusioned with career in organizations or maybe, could they see that there is no point working in organizations if they are not engaged? Could there be a rise of employees working away from organizations ? Could offices be things of the past? What could be some of the trends we could predict if disengagement continues?
Employees with no capability will remain in the organization as a silent killer. Employees, salable to external market may look for option for better opportunity if they are at the early stage of their job. In public sector organization, it is difficult to fire the employees. Management may introduce VRS, if these problems are visible in greater extent in the organization.
I believe it is a matter of managment style and management will to 'not-engage' some and empower some. This can be considered as a natural process but balanced scorecards implementations should be taken into account. In the era where the managers are focused mostly into the micro management and somehow lose the entire picture of the macro thing, this is still to be considered one of theirs handicap.
Organizations must establish PIPs to envision the future of their employees capabilities and compteneces and through it, employees can identify their potentials and see whther they can re-position themselves again within the same organization.Still it is still to the management to decide on the next steps and on both sides future, regardless of the extra-performance or extra-initiative or commitment this employee might show.
Disengagement - wether physical or psychological - is a challenge that requires high management attention. There is a multitude of factors that can lead to disengagement of individuals or even entire departments (e.g. in case of M&A/ take overs). However, there is also a lot of management experience available in successful organizations that allow the business leaders to cope with the challenge - proactively or at least remediating.
According to my experience of 30 years in a global powerhouse in electronics and electrical engineering, I would not rate disengagement as the leading disease in the 21st century, but rather look at the growing number of burn-out cases. Burn-out affects especially highly engaged people who contribute much more than average to corporate success.
Growing competition, also between colleagues, external pressure such as economic crisis, or continuing goal stretching contribute to increase in burn-out cases. When organizations lose (even temporarily) people affected by burn-out, they lose their best.
In my research I have noted that employee disengagement can result in risk blindness in that workers fail to identify hazards in their work areas or simply do not think that the risk applies to them. Complancency, a belief that safety systems will protect them from harm, not knowing what to do when they see a hazard, pressure to produce at ever increasing rates and poor supervision all add to the problem. When risk blindness sets in through employee disengagement we have a recipe for disaster in that firms begin to experience increased accidents, incodents, near misses and equipment and environmental damage. I am currently developing a tool that makes a start in addressing these issues.
Employee disengagement, like any form of disengagement, can be a matter of alienation in general. If anyone feels that they have little or no control over either their surroundings or their task., they will tend toward feeling alienated. It seems a somewhat natural response to being disempowered to simply remove oneself psychologically if not physically. The most appropriate responses would likely fall into the area of job design or perhaps organizational communication.
The nature of disengagement has at its basis a very wide range of meanings, from being indifferent to one of disappointment to one of anger to one of helplessness. Natural emotions would be a driver of subsequent behaviour/s, depending on those possible antecedents. For example, anger might lead to cynicism, or meaninglessness in one’s job can lead to indifference …… or helplessness. In the work of John Cacioppo, negative emotions (negativity bias) are naturally stronger drivers to subsequent behaviours.
Alignment of personal goals and company goals has been an issue for many years. The behavioral scientists have evolved many motivational techniques over the years to re-direct employee motivation in the direction to support company goals/objectives.
In my opinion, this worked well in the past. Now, with both spouses working a major factor for success of the organization is best achieved by the company focusing more on the external factors that contribute to the well being of the individual in their external environment i.e. family, personal interests outside the workplace, etc.
What appears as disengagement may simply be the result of different and higher priorities.
I would say that most individuals are motivated to support the company, but when "push comes to shove" the external and family forces will win the day.
Disengagement in organization can be caused by many factors such as management style, leadership, culture developed within the organization. All of this results in apathy and a tendency to behave opportunistically and pursue short-term goals. The low participation of employees is the impact of management style, leadership and organizational culture. That is, management style, leadership, and culture has become something sacred, which can not be changed. Assumption that employees are rational creatures causing management to forget that employees also have the irrational side that can not be observed with a rational measure. Sense of emotional closeness, for example, can be more effective in moving employees compared to the financial approach. Therefore, management sees employees as a whole person, not just as a rational means of production but also as irrational creatures who can be motivated by touching the side of
Disengagement in organization can be caused by many factors such as management style, leadership, culture developed within the organization. All of this results in apathy and a tendency to behave opportunistically and pursue short-term goals. The low participation of employees is the impact of management style, leadership and organizational culture. That is, management style, leadership, and culture has become something sacred, which can not be changed. Assumption that employees are rational creatures causing management to forget that employees also have the irrational side that can not be observed with a rational measure. Sense of emotional closeness, for example, can be more effective in moving employees compared to the financial approach. Therefore, management sees employees as a whole person, not just as a rational means of production but also as irrational creatures who can be motivated by touching the side of
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Filing