[PDF] 50 shades of gray 2019
[PDF] 50 shades of gray 2020
[PDF] 50 shades of gray 2nd part
[PDF] 50 shades of gray book cover
[PDF] 50 shades of gray book pages
[PDF] 50 shades of gray book quotes
[PDF] 50 shades of gray book release
[PDF] 50 shades of gray book review
[PDF] 50 shades of gray book series
[PDF] 50 shades of gray book summary
[PDF] 50 shades of gray books in order
[PDF] 50 shades of gray cast hate each other
[PDF] 50 shades of gray cast interviews
[PDF] 50 shades of gray cast name
[PDF] 50 shades of gray ebook
Shades of Grey:
An exploratory study of
engagement in work teams
November 2018
Dr Amy Armstrong,
Sharon Olivier and
Sam Wilkinson
2Acknowledgements
We would like to thank all of the teams who took
part in this study. If you had not taken time out from your busy work schedules, this research would not have been possible, so we are very grateful.
We would also like to thank Mez Fokeer, Grace
Brown and Siobhan Renshaw who worked with us
during the data collection phase. Additionally, we would like to thank Cathy Brown, former Executive
Director at Engage for Success for her guidance
and patience, and Andy Campbell, Strategy
Director at Oracle, for advice on many aspects of
this project including the Diagnostic.
This research project has taken a great deal of
time, so we are very grateful for all your continued support!
3Acknowledgements .......................................................
Foreword ............................................................... Executive summary ........................................................ Introduction ........................................................... Engagement - a slippery concept ........................................ What we did ............................................................ What we found .......................................................... Zone of Contentment ........................................................................ Zone of Disengagement ........................................................................ Zone of Pseudo-Engagement........................................................................ Zone of Engagement ......................................................................... Implications ........................................................... Next Steps ................................................................... References ..............................................................
Table of contents
2 4 5 6 8 9 11 12 14 15 16 17 18 19
4It is now widely recognised that employee engagement is a good thing
" and there is a wealth of evidence that suggests a link between levels of employee engag ement and business performance. However, despite the general acceptance of this phenomenon, it does not appear to have translated into widespread improvements in or ganisational outcomes. National measures of performance and productivity remain stubb ornly at, which suggests that there may be issues concerning adoption or execution. One factor to consider is the signicant change to the world of work, brought about by the capabilities of new technology, such as the use of social media to promote a culture of sharing, connectivity and immediate feedback; the rise of the gig economy" and more exible working arrangements; increased team and project-based work s upported by methodologies such as agile" and fast fail" that promote rapid development cycles; and greater transparency of information with a focus on the use of data and evidence-based management. These changes are challenging traditional models of leadership. Organisations are becoming less hierarchical, more egalitarian and collaborative, with performance now often being measured at the team level rather than that of the individua l. As a result, the skills and capabilities of the team leader are more important than ever. Leaders need to demonstrate new skills, behaviours and ways of working that reect th e requirements of this new digital world. Oracle is delighted to support this research. We believe that it oers a really valuable contribution to the debate about how to improve team and organisational performance as well as the working lives of employees.
Andy Campbell
HCM Strategy Director
Oracle
Foreword
5 This study examines engagement in work teams. In what we believe to be the largest UK study of barriers to team engagement to date, researchers from Ashridge Executive Education at Hult International Business School on behalf of Engage for Success and supported by Oracle worked with 195 participants from 28 teams across seven industry sectors. Wh en comparing work teams, our ndings suggest that there are shades of grey" when it comes to team engagement, opposed to teams simply being either engaged or disengaged. As a result, we have identied four zones of team engagement:
Executive Summary
Zone of Contentment
Where team members do the minimum work
required, operate within their capabilities, and go home happy. They do not seek stretch or challenge, and many of them have been in the team or organisation for a long time and are holding out" for retirement. Some do not believe that their work is a context in which they would ever feel engaged, with these people nding engagement in causes" outside of work.
Zone of Disengagement
Where the work is seen as mundane, teams are
inward-looking, seeing themselves as victims of a system that is defective in some way, and where there are cliques and high levels of mistrust between individuals. In disengaged teams, the team leader does not empower or appreciate team members and is often see as having favourites" or treating people unequally, which perpetuates a negative team climate.
Zone of Pseudo-Engagement
Where team members play the system to serve their
own needs, for example, by stretching workload to ll time, or putting a positive spin on the team"s engagement, which does not reect reality. Team leaders in pseudo-engaged teams are more interested integrating themselves to senior management than being available for their team. In pseudo-engaged teams, people may be engaged individually, however they pull in dierent directions and there is little evidence of teamwork.
Zone of Engagement
Where teams are proactive and solution-focused.
In these teams, there is a positive atmosphere.
Team members support each other personally
and professionally. They feel trusted, stretched, empowered and valued and are clear about where their team ts in relation to the bigger picture. In engaged teams, members value diversity, see conict as inevitable and healthy, and use disagreements as a source of creativity and insight. This research challenges traditional binary notions of engagement or dis engagement and questions if engagement surveys present the true story when it comes to team engageme nt. Our ndings show that the three most important factors regardless of which zone a team is loca ted in are: ensuring people are given challenging and varied work; working with trusted colleagues; and having a team leader who is trusted and leads by example. Our ndings have been translated into a team diagnostic and our aim is to develop leadership programs to help managers to successfully lead tea ms to raise their collective engagement and team performance. This tool is freely available online. 5 6
Introduction
The weight of evidence connecting engagement
to improved organisational outcomes is clear. Companies with high levels of engagement experience 40% lower staff turnover than companies with low levels of engagement. Companies with top quartile engagement scores achieve
12% higher customer advocacy and twice the annual net
engagement remains out of reach.
Employee engagement has been a focus of attention
within the HR community and among leaders for well over a decade, and interest in the topic among scholars and business professionals shows no signs of abating. In Google Scholar, the term employee engagement" yields over 850,000 results and according to EBSCO, a leading online reference system, 480 academic articles have been written on the topic in the past three years alone, yet most organisations are still not engaging their people. In Gallup"s (2013) state of the global workplace report, only 13% of people across 142 countries were found to be engaged in their work and the UK has the highest proportion of actively disengaged workers across Western Europe. We know that actively disengaged employees are potentially damaging to organisations. These workers tend to have higher rates of absenteeism, monopolise managers" time and are vocal about their unhappiness, creating a deleterious eect on those around them. If we are better able to understand why engagement levels are so low, and uncover we might do to address poor engagement, we have the potential to transform UK productivity.
This study, which was carried out by researchers
from Ashridge Executive Education at Hult
International Business School in partnership with
Oracle and Engage for Success, sought to nd out
what gets in the way of engagement in work teams and what might be done to address barriers to team engagement. This research project focused on engagement at the level of the team since most existing studies have taken place either at an individual level (i.e. examining an employee"s relationship to their work), or an organisation level (i.e. measuring the connection between individual engagement and organisational outcomes). To 7 date, few studies have explored engagement in teams (Bailey, Madden, Alfes & Fletcher, 2017) and there is a shortage of studies that directly examine barriers to engagement at team level. We know that engagement occurs at a team level (Salanova, Llorens, Cifre, Martinez & Schaufeli, 2003) and the superior performance experienced by engaged teams is related to higher levels or customer care and customer loyalty (Salanova, Agut & Peiro, 2005).
Furthermore, in their 2018 Global Human Capital
Trends report, Deloitte cite team leadership and
team performance as one of the most important issues for organisations to address: "managing the external environment"s macro trends eectively demands an unprecedented level of cross-functional vision, connectivity and collaboration... in which the organisation"s top executives play together as a team while also leading their own functional teams, all in harmony" (2018:4)
Despite the time and resources invested and the
hundreds of millions of pounds spent on leadership and team development, there is little to show when it comes to improving engagement levels (Morgan,
2017). Team engagement, therefore, is a topic that
cannot be ignored.
This report begins by dening the concept of
engagement. The report then outlines our approach to data collection and analysis. We then present our key ndings and close with some suggested steps to tackle barriers to team engagement. 8 "An organisational climate where people choose to give the very best of themselves at work" (Armstrong, 2013:2).
Engagement - A
Slippery Concept
There are a plethora of de
nitions and theories of engagement, yet there is still no universally accepted denition of what it means. One of the reasons f or this lack of consensus may be due to its conceptual overlap with other concepts such as job satisfaction and organisational commitment (Saks & Gruman 2014). We know that engagement contains cognitive, aective and behavioural components, that is to say, it involves our attitudes and feelings towards our work and our behaviours at work. In this study, our aim was not to add further confusion by attempting to unpack the c oncept.
Instead, we dened engagement in outcome terms as:
It is also important to distinguish between the concepts of satisfaction and engagement. Engagement is an active state that is related to productivity and innova tion, where employees choose to go the extra mile" because they want to, not because they are asked. Satisfaction on the other hand can be seen as a passive state that i s related to employee retention (Godding, 2017). Interestingly, of the teams in this study that were selected by their organisations as being highly engaged", 14% were in fact satised", and not engaged (see page 12 where we refer to this as the Zone of Contentm ent). When it comes to team engagement, we know that both the way we are manag ed and our relationships with our colleagues are important. In their review of over
200 engagement
studies, Bailey et al (2017) report that the extent to which we are su pported, trusted and empowered by our manager; the support we receive from our colleagues; an d how safe we feel to be ourselves" in our work teams are some of the strongest predictors of teamquotesdbs_dbs17.pdfusesText_23
[PDF] فیلم fifty shades of gray 2018 - Squarespace