Overcome 68% Disengagement with Goldstein’s 5 Principles of Engagement
Robots do what they’re told, but people need a sense of power and control to be engaged.
In traditional organizations, management is about taking control, not giving it. No wonder disengagement scores hover around 70%. (Gallop 2015 numbers)
5 essentials for engagement*:
- Trust.
- Training.
- Tools.
- Priorities. Knowing what’s important.
- Giving control. The people doing the work exercise the most control over the work.
(Adapted from: Why Are There Snowblowers in Miami)
“Engagement needs to start at the top, and it will flow downward throughout the organization, like water.” Steven D. Goldstein
Goldstein’s Five Principles of Engagement:
#1. Fresh Eyes.
Inertia is a form of disengagement. It’s normal to slip into habits and patterns that result in robot-like disengagement.
- Listen to new employees.
- Take customer complaints seriously.
- Hire consultants.
#2. Connecting.
You must engage with people if you expect them to be engaged. Isolated leaders have disengaged employees.
If you don’t learn their name, don’t expect engagement.
“Leaders connect by interacting authentically with employees, not by dictating to them.” Steven D. Goldstein
Move toward your humanity, not your title.
- Tell stories.
- Let people see your personality.
- Show a little emotion.
- Move away from stereotypical boss behaviors.
#3. Hot Buttons.
People can’t fully engage with 25 priorities.
Multiple focal points dilute engagement. Establish two or three hot button issues. Choose things that make the greatest difference now.
#4. Transparency.
Engagement requires enough information to safely take action without constantly seeking permission.
- How are you getting timely, accurate, relevant information to employees?
- How are you communicating priorities and values?
- How do you respond to mistakes?
#5. Speed.
“Large organizations really need to steal the play-book from start-ups…. Months, quarters, and years, need to be replaced with hours, days, and weeks.” Goldstein
Engagement requires urgency.
Attribution:
This post is the result of reading, “Why Are There Snowblowers in Miami,” and my conversation with the author Steven D. Goldstein.
Steven has over 35 years experience working as an operating executive at Fortune 500 corporations (including as Chairman and CEO of American Express Bank) and midsize companies as well.
Which of Goldstein’s 5 Principles do you find most important to engagement? Why?
What tips for elevating engagement might you suggest?
I love this! I am stepping in as an interim leader and forming a group of unrelated individuals into a research team. The 5 essentials for engagement are exactly what I’m trying to accomplish in this 18 month assignment. Thanks, Dan! My goal is to work myself out of this job and turn over a competent, equipped and well trained team to my successor.
Thanks McSteve. Your vision for yourself is enough to inspire my engagement. Best wishes
Dan, “‘Engagement needs to start at the top, and it will flow downward throughout the organization, like water.’ Steven D. Goldstein”
Now we know why most engagement efforts fail, they don’t start at the top.
Managers are more like sieves rather than sponges, knowledge passes through with little retained.
Internal motivation, unlike external motivation, is not under the control of the employer. Managers who know this don’t make the mistake of presuming that they can change employees’ internal motivation.
When there are disengaged or problem employees we need not look beyond managers and executives.
– Too many employees are in the wrong jobs, i.e., management errors.
– Too many managers are in the wrong jobs, i.e., executive errors.
– Too many executives are in the wrong jobs, i.e., CEO errors.
– Too many managers and executives Reward A hoping for B.
– Poorly behaving employees are tolerated, i.e., management errors.
– Poorly behaving managers are tolerated, i.e., executive errors.
– Poorly behaving executives are tolerated, i.e., CEO errors.
– In other words, we get who we hire and who we promote.
If we want to break the cycle, then begin hiring the right people for all positions.
Thanks Bob. I really like the idea that if we are leaders change starts with us. When we don’t like what we see around us, the question is how do I need to change.
I really appreciate: “Move toward your humanity, not your title.” I find it too easy to give my behavior over to ego rather than my EQ. Understanding and patience get so much farther than posturing and declarations… Thanks for another great coaching session in this post, Dan!
Thanks Allen. I fear that engagement becomes more about power an manipulation when we think position is the answer.
There are also aspects of personal history here. “Trust is the Residue of Promises Fulfilled” is a quote by my friend Frank Navran and I strongly believe that a lot of people don’t act simply because of a past bad history of that with current or previous managers. Few people have little previous history…
And a lot of people are not just un-engaged but they are anchored in this un-engagement or even actively dis-engaged. Competition is more of a norm in organizations than collaboration and teamwork so people are unwilling to step up – most do not want to try such firewalking and why should they?
It’s NOT a training issue. There are no “skills” around being involved. It is all perceptual and motivational. If you put a gun to their heads, they COULD act engaged, so it is not skill but all the experiential and situational choice stuff. They CHOOSE not to be engaged for a whole variety of reasons that training will not influence. Training applies only when they can’t, and they CAN if they want to.
And the “hiring consultants” thing is simply goofy. Why not change the behavior of their managers to improve their willingness to let go and listen. Data from dozens of years show that few people think their boss really listens to them at ANY level of the organization (and they do not TRUST their boss in many cases, even at top levels).
Hot buttons and speed are okay. But again, people need to CHOOSE to be involved.
I frame this whole thing as an issue of Dis-Un-Engagement and have blogged about it for years. We need to ACTIVELY work to remove those things that are actively acting to un-engage people. We need to identify and minimize the roadblocks that are in the way of people starting to act like they are engaged. If they try it, and are not punished for taking that step forward, they are more likely to improve a little more and a little more.
It is NOT a magic wand and some fairy dust that makes this change — it is about good management practices and the active seeking out of ideas, issues and opportunities.
(In my opinion.)
.
Thanks Dr. Scott. I loved reading your insights. The use of the term goofy made me smile because I have a history of reading your comments.
The trouble with connecting history with engagement is that history can’t be changed. I suppose if everyone faces a negative history with candor, transparency, and forward-facing curiosity, we would see higher levels of engagement. In that sense, I’m on board.
Engagement is a choice. We can create environments and build relationships that make engagement more likely.
Thanks again.
My “boss” (term used intentionally) has completely forgotten the need or value of engagement with those throughout the organization. Being a direct report with responsibility over one of four key divisions of the organizations requires me to pick up the torch and lead the message. I couldn’t agree more with everything you wrote. I love the relationship and leadership opportunities this is providing me. The anxiousness is a lack of confidence/transparency in where the boss is going. We have identified the core values of the organization – what do you do when the person at the top no longer upholds?
Thanks Ken. There’s a little phrase in your comment that really catches my attention. “The anxiousness is a lack of confidence/transparency in where the boss is going.”
When leaders let people into the inner circle anxiety goes down. When we wonder what the boss is thinking and where she/he is going, fear sets in. So powerful and so easy to solve.
Great points! I take issue, however, with the notion “engagement requires urgency.” Engagement requires communicating what is truly important and purposeful. Speed and urgency are often symptoms of fear, disorganization, lack of reflection. Sometimes, it doesn’t hurt to take it slow to advance more quickly.
Thanks Kim. So glad you dropped in. The idea of urgency got me thinking about one of the main reasons projects fail. They simply take too long. Short-term is better than long-term when it comes to engagement. Perhaps that’s a better way to say it. However, when times are urgent, engagement is easier.
Humility is a sign of emotion. Transparency increases trust. I like images in behavior gap. It’s an investment site yet I learn so much from this image on Humility isn’t a weakness.
https://www.behaviorgap.com/humility-isnt-weakness/
Again, thank you.
Thanks Pilgrim. Love the simple graph on the page your reference.
I can say that the Leadership at LRH ER must have taken this rules of engagement to heart. I can check off the boxes quite easily. We utilized Gemba Board, huddles, Unit Based Council, Trauma UBC to keep the staff engaged with a quick response time from management. A great post for those future nursing leaders.
Thank you!
Thanks Lilian. It’s refreshing to such a positive story. I think the idea of a quick response time from management is essential. In other words, if we expect employees to be engaged, management must lead the way.
Hot buttons: often there are too many priorities and so we get lost in the shuffle. Which ones are real? We feel overwhelmed when too many over stimulating items are in the radar. People cannot multi-task 25 items so the give up and get by in a very disengaged fashion and then come the disenchanted employees that leave to other facilities or employment areas that are perhaps far worse but have talented leaders who know how to minimize distractors and focus on what’s most important! Scattered energy throws weight in many directions will lose potency and lead to ineffective group dynamics and direction!
Thanks Patrina. You really teased out the importance of limiting the number of hot button issues. I don’t know about you, but I’m easily confused! 🙂
To address Patricia’s thought on hot buttons, the ones that get measured / the ones that get comments or feedback from management are the real ones… And people cannot operate when everything is measured because then, everything is important. This is all part of that alignment issue, where what we are asked to do meshes with missions and visions. What is real are the goals and expectations of the immediate boss; hopefully they are aligned!
Thanks Dr. Scott. When considering engagement, mission and vision seem essential. Without them, it’s possible to be engaged in the ‘wrong’ things.
Thanks for keeping the conversation going.
Motivating others is a deep topic. Can you list all the types and methods associated with motivating others? It is helpful to also know what not to do. I teach my kids you can learn a lot from what not to do, even if it is humorous like 3 stooges, Marx brothers, Dilbert, Far Side, or Rube Goldberg. I noticed there are various types used to motivate others in various endeavors, e.g. military, hospital, religious, family, corporate, sports, torture, sales, shame, guilt, competition, etc. When a military type motivation is used in family, it isn’t always a good fit. Likewise, a family type motivation used in corporate may not be a good fit. I find it fascinating when typical motivation types are moved to a different endeavor. It helps us to call a time out and reconsider when the dark motivations types are applied to an endeavor, with the intention of good results. Yet for some people, it is difficult to determine what, if anything, will motivate them.