Tag: leadership

Categories
Engagement

The Psychological Recession & Generational Engagement: Interview with Dr. Judith Bardwick

Dr. Judy Bardwick

I don’t remember when I started reading (and frequently quoting) posts by Judith M. Bardwick, Ph.D., but I was hooked on her insight into employee and organizational development. A highly respected writer, consultant, and speaker, she is known for combining “cutting-edge psychological research with practical business applications to optimize organizational performance.”

I recently reached out to Dr. Bardwick and am honored to feature her here.

QSM: You wrote about the “psychological recession” nearly ten years ago to describe the work environment in your groundbreaking book, One Foot Out the Door: How to Combat the Psychological Recession That’s Alienating Employees and Hurting American Business. What is the Psychological Recession, and why does it still matter? 

Judy: The Psychological Recession is a bleak feeling of vulnerability to bad forces that are too large for an individual to control or manage.  It can be triggered by individual events, i.e., losing your job, or huge events like the periodic recessions our economy falls into.  A Psychological Recession lasts much longer than the economic one because being/feeling depressed leads to greater feelings of being powerless and hapless.

A perfect example would be the endless reference to the Great Depression (and now the Great Recession) over several generations.  My grandparents raised it as a lesson for their children to be economically prudent and I was taught the same lesson by their children, who were my parents.  As a result, I pay bills quickly, never borrow money, and am never in debt.

One Foot Out the Door by Dr. Judy BardwickThe Psychological Recession matters a hell of a lot because the economy grows as a result of OPTIMISM and TRUST.  There is little or no trust of government or business in the face of a Psychological Recession and, equally powerful, there is PESSIMISM AND THEREFORE ECONOMIC CAUTION which means little or no investing because investing depends on being able to see the future in a positive light.

At the present time we have very large, very vulnerable groups of people including, especially, the long-term jobless or under-employed, recent college grads, uneducated low wage populations, and scariest of all, the previously successful middle class.

These phenomena were clearest first in developed economies and now include emerging economies.  At the present time, you can see the effects of expecting future blows and endless vulnerability world-wide in the general low levels of investment and the destructive growth of caution-creating bureaucratic regulations.

We need the bottle to be seen as half-FULL for nations to return to GDP growth levels of 3.5-4.00.

QSM: You’ve written extensively about optimizing organizational performance, advocating “the well being of employees has to be perceived not as a cost — but rather as an investment with a large pay-off.” Given little improvement in national studies on employee engagement, why are we making such little progress in increasing employee engagement? Also, what do you think is most important for the next generation of managers to know about building a workplace culture with employees based on trust, respect, and commitment?

Judy: I don’t see enough direct data to be certain of the answer but my sense of it is no employees are perceived as individuals and individuals want and need to be respected, included, and valued.

It’s my belief that most HR people and many executives define FAIRNESS as treating everyone identically.  When everyone gets the same benefits, same forms of recognition, same incentives … none of it has any value.  If someone believes they are making very significant contributions to the business of the business, and others make some contributions and some contribute nothing, and the organization does not differentiate between them, the result is resentment and anger followed by apathy.

You will notice that the actions are decided and directed by the employer with basically little or no input from the employee.  This is no way to make friends.

What people most want changes over a period of a decade or two depending on large part on the economy and the size of opportunity.  It was absolutely logical that the Great Generation, which experienced the Depression and WWII, greatest wish was for economic security, and the great companies gave employees security for life if they were loyal and stayed with the organization.  The next generation, the older boomers, took security for granted and most wanted opportunities to succeed, become autonomous and find meaning in their work.  Younger boomers looked for a balanced life as many parents were educated and women began to enter the professional labor force.

Following the Great Recession security reappears as hugely valuable.  There’s no surprise there.

There are other important motives at different times:  Before the Great Recession the Millennials wanted their coworkers to be their equals; they wanted their lifestyle to reflect their basic values so many businesses moved from an urban environment to a suburban or rural one.  They put flexibility high on their list because both parents were employed and their kids needed to be driven to school and other activities …

How do you know what’s most important to an INDIVIDUAL who also happens to be a member of a generation?  The fundamental answer you ask is, “What would make your life more satisfying or easier that we could help you with?”  That requires a trusting relationship between the questioner and the employee.

The question is open-ended. It provides no guidance or limit.  How could an organization handle an unlimited number of answers?  The answer is, if you think ABSTRACTLY, the number of things people most value will range from 1-3 in or following harder economic times and 3-6 when the economy is good and creating opportunities.  The vast majority of what people want most will fall into a limited number of categories.  Any organization can handle 6 kinds of categories.  And if someone asks for something impossible, say that and encourage an alternative.  And, the question might be posed every year or two because the answer can change.

For example, autonomy is highly desired when times are good.  What might that include?  How about having freedom about the time when you come to work and when you leave; having freedom to decide where you work or what you are working on; having time to create and initiate new projects; having freedom about the team you join or the members you invite to join the team you’re building.

Chapter 8 in my book, One Foot Out the Door, discusses CUSTOMIZATION at length.  But the take-home of this answer is while “WE” characterizes great teams and families, it is also necessary to recognize that there’s also always an “I” that needs to be recognized.  Customization is all about responding to “I”.  If an organization, or a family, or a group does that, Engagement and Commitment will soar.

QSM: As a business professional and academic, what do you think should be taught in schools – and in life – to prepare young people to be engaged and productive members in the workplace?

Judy:  I’ve been married twice.  My second husband was “a Mustang” in the military.  That means he started out as an 18 year old high school graduate who entered the Coast Guard as a black shoe sailor and rose to become a Captain (next rank is Admiral).  When we married he still had some of his high school books and I was amazed by their content.  He and the other students in his small, rural high school were required to think, comprehend, abstract, and write and talk at the college level.  And, in addition to the academic learning, they also mastered cooking and sewing, building and gardening, ethics and behavior.  When they graduated from high school they were ready to become responsible and independent adults.

What a difference a generation or two makes!

Young people today are generally vastly more skilled in using technology than their parents.  In that sense they’re sophisticated.  But personal development, taking on responsibility, being independent and inter-dependent is hit or miss.  They are very aware of what’s in and politically acceptable but they run in groups.  Real independence is as rare as divergent thinking.

Too many of our children and adolescents are much too coddled by parents and teachers.  They have too little freedom to explore and take risks and start developing confidence and resilience.  “Good” and “Bad” have lost their ethical power for behavioral guidance and have become too judgmental in this solely relative world of explanations and excuses.  “Selfies” are prized photographs because narcissism is endemic.  High School and College kids know nothing of America’s founding and its historic values.  Civics, Government, History and Geography are not addressed adequately or at all in many schools.  In general, there’s too little discipline imposed, much less self-developed, and there’s too much ignorance and lack of appreciation of what came before them.

In short, there’s not much perspective as a result of most contemporary education.

Most of what I’m talking about in terms of personal development is taught in places like Montessori schools and to some extent in charter schools.  But to a harrowing extent none of this is taught in most schools partly because the focus has shifted to national test scores.  While we certainly need all of our children to be able readers, writers and users of math, we also need them to grow up.  Much of that process now depends on parental models of behavior and rising expectations by parents of growing maturity, insight, autonomy, responsibility and empathy on the part of their children.

My brother and I grew up in a tiny village of 3 or 4 square blocks in New York City.  Most of the parents were immigrants, all of whom valued education as one of their highest priorities.  I don’t remember our parents helping us with our homework or supervising our play.  There were known rules and we pretty much obeyed them, and we certainly worked hard at meeting our parent’s unspoken expectations of behavior and achievement.  I don’t think we gave any of it much thought in the sense that our friend’s parents had the same rules and high expectations.  And in our little village, everyone knew everything about everyone.

Without the support of institutions like schools, churches, and neighborhoods where many people know each other and each other’s children, optimizing your child’s academic and personal development is an enormous burden on parents. Changing the circumstances of academic and personal learning will require a major shift in cultural values and priorities.  Unfortunately, but frequently, that kind of huge change needs things to get worse before there is any way they can get better.

QSM: Thank you, Judy!

Categories
Engagement

The Market’s Impact on Employee Engagement

How does the economy affect the practice of employee engagement?

In times of low unemployment when there is strong competition for qualified people to fill positions, organizations scramble to find and keep good employees. Strategic recruitment and retention take center stage in a tight labor market. In this situation, the case for employee engagement is a no-brainer.

In times of high unemployment when there are fewer positions available, it’s employees who scramble to find and keep jobs. Instead of being viewed as marketable talent (“What will it take to get you to work for us?”), employees are viewed as expendable commodities (“You’re lucky to have a job, so we don’t care about keeping you happy.”). This is when engagement is viewed as an unnecessary expense.

Investment in workplace engagement, unfortunately, varies based on the economy.

“In boom cycles, leaders tend to have a healthy focus on what needs to be done to continue to drive profitable growth. But as soon as the bubble bursts, they turn to an unhealthy focus on results, which decreases employee commitment [and] discretionary effort, and negatively impacts productivity, and overall market performance.” Dr. Clark Perry

We don’t need no stinkin’ engagement … or do we?

Market fluctuations should not be an excuse to abandon employee engagement efforts. For example, consider the impact that high unemployment has on consumer spending — when fewer people are working, they spend less. As a result, companies need to work harder to compete for customers. Employees who find themselves treated as expendable are unlikely to go out of their way to best serve current and prospective customers. It’s the reason I remind executives and business owners that the way your employees feel is the way your customers will feel. And if your employees don’t feel valued, neither will your customers!

It’s also why employee engagement is a smart strategy regardless of the market situation.

Categories
Engagement

Favorite Quotes on Why Employee Engagement is Still a Challenge

“Employers, challenged by globalization, low productivity, wage pressure and talent shortages are not investing in people as they once did. They have gone from a traditional role of being builders of talent to consumers of work.” Jonas Prising, Human Age 2.0: Future Forces at Work

” … true employee engagement rests on building better leadership and approach to people. It’s not about picnics and awards.”  Deb Lavoy

“Why is demonstrating real respect and value for your employees so difficult? Maybe because it isn’t in the DNA of financially-focused CEOs and/or it’s not high in the list of outcome metrics for which they’re held accountable.” Bill McEwen

‘” … employees choose to engage when a company connects with them as human beings and not as resources.” Paul Hebert

“Enlightened employers know that committed and engaged employees are the critical resource for continuous innovation, effectiveness and productivity. They know that the people doing the actual work often know more than the people in the executive suite about what’s needed in order to succeed. Respect for employee flows from respect for their contributions.” Dr. Judith M. Bardwick

“The result of continually undermining employees’ efforts, particularly when they’re performing according to company standards, is increased employee frustration and disengagement.” Sybil F. Stershic

“People work just hard enough to not get fired, and companies pay employees just enough that they don’t quit.” Paul Kiewiet

Categories
Customer service Engagement

Companies Get Lucky (?) with Partial Engagement

“I love working with my customers. They’re what keep me engaged. Can’t say I feel the same about the company I work for.”

“I’m upset by the lack of professionalism in my office. Co-workers dress sloppily. They curse in the office and don’t seem to take work seriously.  What keeps me going are the conversations I have with my counterparts in other offices.”

These highlight discussions I had recently with business professionals in different fields. I’ve heard similar sentiments from employees who stay engaged for the satisfaction of working with their customers and/or co-workers. According to a TINYPulse study on engagement and organizational culture, “Peers and camaraderie are the number one reason employees go the extra mile … not the money. Camaraderie plays the true motivating role in encouraging employees to outperform expectations.

Enjoying their work with co-workers and customers is key to employees being engaged, but it’s not enough. Total engagement happens when employees connect on three fundamental levels:

  • with the organization itself  – when employees understand the organization’s purpose and strategy, including knowing where they fit in and what’s expected of them.
  • with customers – when employees know who the customers are and what is important to them so employees can better serve them.
  • with fellow employees – when employees also understand and respect how everyone’s work is interconnected in achieving organizational goals.

The people I spoke to acknowledged they’re not disengaged, just partially engaged. How fortunate for their employers. But I can’t help wondering how much better they and their respective companies would be if they were fully engaged on all levels.

As Meatloaf sang, “two out of three ain’t bad.”  Or is it?

 

 

 

Categories
Engagement

There’s No “Me” in Leadership

I spoke recently with a colleague about the organizational damage done by CEOs whose egos outweigh their management and people skills. Rather than creating a legacy of their greatness, these executives often leave a toxic workplace in their wake.

“If a leader with a big ego and threatening manner takes over, employees become focused on satisfying the leader instead of focusing on the organization’s mission. … Big threatening egos produce apathy as they focus on the ‘me’ instead of ‘we.’  They refocus most people on protecting themselves from the wrath of egos. Hardly the path to success.”  Kate Nasser in a post about leadership.

Ultimately, as my colleague pointed out, “The organization’s culture should be bigger than any one person.” The good news is most organizations are resilient and can survive such executives.

But at what cost?

The fallout is low morale, high disengagement, and high turnover that result in a weakened internal brand struggling to retain or attract talent. With the right leader in place, however, the organization can recover.

It just takes a lot longer for employees who had to suffer through the former CEO’s reign of terror.

 

Categories
Engagement Training & Development

Don’t Discount the New Year for Employee Engagement

Every four years it happens in the U.S. – a presidential election. Too often, it’s also an excuse companies use to withhold spending based on an uncertain outcome: “We’re afraid to invest in new initiatives until we know what’s going to happen in Washington, DC.”

This wait-and-see attitude carries over into cutbacks on hiring, training & development and, ultimately, engagement. The result is a double whammy for employees — besides feeling anxious over the new year’s uncertainty, they also become frustrated with limited-to-nonexistent options for their development as the organization goes into a holding pattern. Who wants to work for a company that isn’t moving forward?

“Progress always involves risks. You can’t steal second base and keep your foot on first base.” – Frederick B. Wilcox

Uncertainty is a fact of life, regardless of what’s scheduled to occur in any given year. Holding the line by not investing in employee recruitment and ongoing development may seem like a safe strategy, but it’s also a risky one that can negatively impact employee engagement and the internal brand. Think of the opportunities such a strategy opens up for competitors who aren’t afraid to devote resources to support their employees.

No one can predict the future, other than knowing it will change. Like an ostrich with its head in the sand, hiding isn’t a viable option for business and brand success.

“He that will not sail till all dangers are over must never put to sea.” – Thomas Fuller

 

 

 

Categories
Engagement Training & Development

‘The Good, the Bad and the Ugly’ of Disruptive Leaders

As a strong advocate of an engaged workplace, I was apprehensive about this executive education session – “Disruptive Leaders are Good for Business” – given by Dick Brandt, Executive Director of Lehigh University’s Iacocca Institute. Dick is a well-respected international consultant and frequent speaker on leadership, and I was intrigued with this particular topic.

Dick talked about Apple’s Steve Jobs and Tesla’s Elon Musk and how their “shared genius” and business success were based on their vision, obsession with design perfection, and conviction taken to the extreme. He also mentioned Amazon’s Jeff Bezos as a disruptive and difficult leader.  The style of these men, who transformed major industries, may be “abusive, arrogant, and intolerant” — opposite the servant leadership style found in engaged workplaces. Disruptive leaders, according to Dick, are “noted for their determination – a trait that actually dwarfs all other skills.” As a result, “people skills and collaboration may be left behind.”

Jobs, Musk, and Bezos are not the poster boys for running Firms of Endearment. Yet, one can’t argue about their business success. Truly transformative, disruptive leaders are rare, and it’s important to learn from them — acknowledging both the positive and negative aspects of their management styles.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Categories
Engagement

How to Keep Your Employees Engaged During the Holidays

The last few weeks of the calendar year are stressful in the workplace as people become distracted preparing for the holidays. Employees can be overwhelmed with year-end reporting and planning deadlines just as everyone else seems to be using up the last of their vacation days. And those at work may be so into the holiday frenzy that they’ve mentally checked out.

Here are five ways managers can help employees stay on-task and engaged during the holiday season.

  • Keep employees mission-focused, customer-focused, and connected.
    Respectfully remind employees how year-end projects and planning are critical to your company’s mission and goals. Make time to recognize employees’ individual and collective efforts in taking care of customers and each other as the year winds down.
  • Acknowledge and alleviate seasonal stresses.
    Consider what you can do ahead of time to minimize year-end pressures such as starting your business planning cycle earlier (if feasible) to avoid a planning crunch when fewer people are at work. Or schedule the employee holiday lunch or dinner party in January when there are fewer social activities; this also gives employees something to look forward to after the holidays.
  • Ask employees to share their ideas.
    Go to the source and solicit suggestions from your employees as to what might be done to improve productivity during this time of year — whether in a special discussion at staff meetings or as a project for a designated employee task force.
  • Inspire and de-stress.
    • Invite employees to share with each other how they cope with seasonal work stress … the funniest holiday situation they’ve encountered at work … how they successfully defused a difficult situation with a customer, etc.
    • Give-back to the community by volunteering time as a group to work in a food bank or collect gifts for needy families. To keep such an activity from creating more stress, however, employee involvement must be voluntary with no management or peer pressure regarding time and financial contributions.
    • While bringing holiday sweets to the office is welcome by many, also consider healthy ways to reduce stress. For example, a licensed massage therapist can be hired on-site to provide 10-15 minute back massages for employees or a yoga instructor can lead mini-meditation sessions.
  • Patience, patience, patience.
    Keep in mind the end of the year can be a challenging time for everyone: you, your customers, employees, colleagues, and business partners.

Try one or more of these ideas to help get through the season. When you find what works, you can apply it next year when you go through this all over again. Happy Holidays!

 

Categories
Engagement

Evangelizing Corporate Culture: Interview with Culture Consultant Donavon Roberson

Remember taking those career aptitude tests in high school? Back then the position of “Corporate Culture Consultant” didn’t exist. If it did, knowing what I know now, that’s what I would have chosen as my preferred career.

Lucky for corporate America, it’s a valuable role that exists today. That’s why I’m delighted to feature culture consultant Donavon Roberson in this interview.  He was among the first of Zappos Insights’ Culture Evangelists responsible for helping executives learn about Zappos’ respected culture. He was also my personal tour guide when I visited Zappos in 2008.

Donavon eventually left Zappos and went on to pioneer the position at several other companies, holding titles such as Manager of Culture Development and Dream Manager. He’s the founder and Culture Consultant for The Roberson Company that’s focused on “Purpose, Process, People and Performance.”

QSM: Please tell us a bit about your background, including how you ended up as a corporate culture consultant.

Donavon: I was a youth pastor for nearly 13 years and during that time I learned the value of living by vision and values. When I had the opportunity to work for Zappos, I discovered the importance of a company that lives for their vision and values. I have had the privilege being able to take my ministry background and my business experience and meld the two together. It’s all about moving the needle in the lives of others … culture development is about building into the lives of others so that they build into the business.

QSM: Based on your experience, what are some of the best things management can do to get employees to embrace a company’s culture?

Donavon: In my opinion, management should lead the charge when it comes to culture. They should embody the expression of and example of company culture. Management needs to ensure that they are operating in a way that is consistent with the cultural expectations to which they hold others.

It’s OK if they themselves aren’t an embodiment of every value; however, there should be an open appreciation for and expectation of living out the company culture at the very highest levels. With that expectation should come an inspection of the behaviors expressed. It is VITAL that management be held accountable to the culture and hold others to the culture.

The worst thing that management OR leadership can do is to live in a way that is counter to the expressed culture. There is often an aspired culture (the culture that we would like to have) and an actual culture (the culture that truly exists). Often these two cultures are at odds and employees pick up on that quickly. This can be toxic for an organization. What is worse is what I call the accepted culture — the culture that is counter to either of the aforementioned but that which is accepted as a normal way of doing things … especially at the leadership levels.

QSM: You’ve worked with both established and start-up companies. What challenges did you find in helping shape company culture in a start-up compared to working with more established organizations?

Donavon: The challenge in either company is scalability and sustainability. The culture that many start ups have isn’t scalable, meaning it doesn’t grow very well as the company grows. With growth comes aches and pains that can stunt development and progress. When a company is in the infancy stages, it is important to think about how the choices they make today will grow into the future (if growth is part of the long range plan).

Sustainability is the company’s ability to keep culture efforts or initiatives going and consistent as a company grows. Often times an effort makes sense at the beginning and can be easily managed with little to no effort BUT as you grow you must consider the time, effort and energy that cultural efforts will have on the bottom line and determine if it is worth the ROI.

QSM:  Building and maintaining a workplace culture is not a solitary endeavor. What’s the risk of serving in a position designated as a “Chief Culture Evangelist”?

Donavon: This is an interesting question, and I don’t know that I have definitive answer; however, I do have some thoughts that I would like to share. I have found that Wall Street isn’t ready to embrace the idea of a Chief Culture Evangelist or team dedicated to culture development. The greatest issue is ROI. There are some very logical conclusions why these roles would be valuable to any organization — leadership development, employee engagement, customer service, etc. However these conclusions aren’t necessarily reflected on the bottom line: the measurement of Wall Street and Investors.

I have found that many companies in the start up stage have the flexibility to have a dedicated “culture team” but when investors enter the picture that is the first team to take a hit.

QSM: What advice would you give to someone considering a career in corporate culture development?

Donavon: Advice that I would give is to determine standards and acceptable standards of measurements for success at the outset. How do you know when the culture team is successful? What does it look like when the culture team is successful? How is that reflected in the bottom line? And then continually go back and do the research and make the adjustments necessary to remain relevant and impactful.

QSM: Thank you, Donavon!

Categories
Engagement

What Matters in Recognition and Employee Engagement: Interview with Zane Safrit

I met Zane Safrit by phone several years ago when he interviewed me on his radio show, and we’ve stayed in touch to share our work in employee engagement and organizational leadership. Our most recent conversation centered on employee happiness as a factor in employee engagement.

Zane has held numerous positions ranging from customer service rep to CEO over the course of his impressive career where he applied employee recognition and engagement for positive results. He’s now a successful business consultant helping companies do the same. He’s also the author of Recognize THEM!: 52 Ways to Recognize Your Employees In Ways They Value and The Engaged Hiring Process: A Simple Plan to Help You Hire the Best. Zane’s latest book, First, Engage Yourself, shares do-able steps that managers can use to create a culture of engagement. I’m honored to feature him on my blog.

QSM: Zane, let’s start with the of importance of recognizing employees. What matters in recognition that we’re not doing?

Zane: The “What” matters less in employee recognition than the “Who.” The employee in employee recognition matters most.

  • How do they like being recognized? A personal note, a conversation – informal or formal, a gift, a plaque.
  • When do they like being recognized? Are they a morning person or an afternoon person? That depends on their work demands and those who deserve recognition are very committed to their work – their team, their customers, their integrity. Choose the time when it interferes the least.
  • Where, in private or in a meeting, standing in front of the group or with the group?

Use their name, articulate what’s being recognized and why, communicate why and how it matters to you and those around you. Then find the right venue to share that recognition. The right venue is the one that matters most to the person being recognized.

Otherwise, they will have difficulties digesting this just dessert, and the recognition loses its impact at best and is counter-productive at worst. Like a politician popping up at an event for which they deserve no credit, you’ll give a speech, blah blah, leaving the recipient feeling awkward. You’ll have missed a great opportunity to honor that person and build a relationship with trust and engagement.

QSM: If employee recognition is so basic, why is it so difficult to apply/practice?

Zane: Employee recognition is built on the virtues of compassion and empathy. They’re innate, we’re born with them. Like seeds, they only need a chance to set roots in our behaviors and perceptions. After that we’ll find the means to nurture them or not.

Too much of our culture fails to nurture those qualities. That’s being generous to say it like that. Too much of our culture degrades, denigrates, demoralizes those who show empathy and compassion, patience, forgiveness.

In too many corporate cultures, careers are built and rewarded on the basis of denying compassion and empathy. The hard-charging, tough-minded, gets-things-done-no-matter-what manager is rewarded with perks and privileges and moves up the career ladder. Employees watch, learn and change. They change their behavior and attitudes to better emulate those they see moving ahead.

Upton Sinclair, author of The Jungle, wrote: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

So, as long as the rewards are weighted towards disengaging behaviors many people will change to deny their natural tendencies or they’ll favor the development of other, less healthy tendencies of narcissism, arrogance, betrayal. That will keep it difficult to engage in healthy, sustaining ways with each other.

We have the choice. We can create our own conversations which lead to cultures. It’s always a choice. And it’s understandable which choices are taken.

QSM: Do you think employee engagement is still relevant? Where do you see engagement 5-10 years from now?

Zane: I have a love/hate relationship with the term “employee engagement.”

I love it for serving as an umbrella under which we can gather to discuss, debate, create and clarify the many activities, issues and factors related to creating a place to work where we’re proud, happy and productive.

I hate it for its sterile academic tone and because it’s being co-opted by too many experts who’d rather you engage with them than with each other: your peers and colleagues and direct reports.

What happens 5-10 years from now? We’ll always have engagement and the best organizations – the ones with the highest purpose that are most sustaining and most profitable – will have the highest engagement. That being said, expectations of and definitions of best will change. We’ll see significant changes to institutions, social norms, organizational climate, the economy, politics. Those will change the expectations around what’s considered engaged, what’s our highest hopes for an engaged workplace or community and what we need to survive.

QSM: As a business professional, what do you think should be taught in schools (K-12 and college) to prepare students to be engaged, productive members of the workplace?

Zane: I love this question! It ties in with the question about if it’s so basic, why’s it so difficult to practice.

I think these negative reinforcements, rewards for the wrong behavior start as children enter school. No, this isn’t a diatribe about teachers or even common core and standardized tests. No, this started when John Dewey began lining kids up in rows of desks to sit silent and only raise a hand when called on and to work diligently, by themselves, to memorize only what’s presented and to never-ever ask Why, What if, Why Not? That prepared them, us, to sit in orderly rows of cubicles and look to the manager and bosses for direction and appropriate behaviors.

I’m not a childhood education expert. I don’t have kids. I don’t even have a pet. And I’ve never stayed in a Holiday Inn Express, either.

However, the skills of communication and collaboration, of team-work and team-building, of helping, of recognizing what makes each child unique as well as what commonalities are shared and, yes, of competition should be taught. Writing, debating, creating, art, theater, rhetoric, painting, drawing, music, athletics especially with team sports, those should be funded once again. These are all activities that help children learn to listen, to understand, to communicate ideas and find common ground, to collaborate and create together and to embrace diversity of ideas, even failures. These are activities that nurture those innate virtues of compassion and empathy.

Standardized tests work well with testing equipment not people.

Teachers, I believe, want the resources and mandates to teach to learn not to pass those tests.

I hope this stirs a discussion.

QSM: Thanks, Zane!

To continue the discussion, I invite you who are reading this post to comment: What do you think should be taught in schools to prepare students to be engaged and productive members of the workplace?