Here are the numbers:
Positively Engaged
|
Percent of Total
|
Negatively Engaged
|
Percent of Total
|
Fully Engaged
|
14%
|
Disengaged
|
23%
|
Moderately Engaged
|
29%
|
Under Engaged
|
35%
|
The only good news here is that it’s been worse. When you recognize that a fully engaged employee is 240% more productive, more innovative and delivers highest quality work as compared to all other employees, having only 14% of your workforce doing that is appalling.
This isn't good news, it's a continuation of terrible news.
We know of organizations where the workforce is at, or near 100% fully engaged. There’s a difference in how these organizations operate. They typically do not have an engagement program or engagement initiatives. Those programs and initiatives are typically top-down activities delivered under a command-and-control environment.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/990c4/990c49db3d80b6b0562208b2dc3ab8ec8b7b8a38" alt=""
“The problem with empowerment programs is that they contain an inherent contradiction between the message and the method. While the message is ‘empowerment’ the method--it takes me to empower you--fundamentally disempowers employees. .. I didn’t understand why empowerment was needed. It seemed to me that humans are born in a state of action and natural empowerment...Empowerment programs appeared to be a reaction to the fact that we had actively disempowered people....I felt my power cam from within, and attempts to empower me felt like manipulation.”1
1 Marquet, L. David. Turn the Ship Around!: How to Create Leadership at Every Level. Austin, TX: Greenleaf Book Group, 2012. Print.