Engagement has been a buzz word in the Human Resources world ever since it was first conceptualized in the early ‘90s. Despite its popularity among HR professionals, an official, consistently -used definition has never been reached. Every definition of Engagement since the ‘90s has, however, included two basic principals: 1. That Engaged employees are more likely to be loyal to the company, and therefore less likely to leave (according to research from HR Solutions, Engaged Employees are 3.5 times more likely to stay with their organization than Disengaged Employees), and 2. That Engaged employees are willing to exert extra discretionary effort and energy into their jobs which leads to better outcomes for customers and the organization. While this definition is technically correct, it has become more than a bit outdated since it was introduced nearly twenty years ago. HR Solutions, Inc. has determined that the current definition is missing a key, and crucial, third component – the employee’s interest in knowing about, willingness to own, and improving one’s personal Engagement.
Changing this one component shifts a portion of the responsibility for Engagement. It was once thought that the responsibility for creating an Engaged workforce lay completely in the hands of management. Now, however, HR Solutions’ current revelation alters the definition of Engagement such that Engagement is a joint responsibility that should be shared by management and employees. There are three groups of Engagement that employees can belong to: Actively Engaged Employees, Ambivalent Employees, and Actively Disengaged Employees. By learning about which group of Engagement they fit into, employees can take steps to become more Engaged in the workplace.
“Many organizations have come to realize that their Employee Engagement levels have reached a standstill,”
