Engagement and Leadership

According to Gallup's "State of the Global Workplace 2023," the percentage of employees engaged with their work in 2023 is the highest, yet this number is only 23%, which is still extremely low. This is especially concerning when compared to the percentage of employees who are "quiet quitters," meaning they are disengaged, which stands at 59%.

The problem with disengagement is that it is harmful not only to the worker and their colleagues but also to the company. According to this Gallup report, currently, low engagement costs the global economy $8.8 trillion, representing 9% of the Global Gross Product (GGP).

An interesting correlation that this report brings is how stress at work impacts the level of engagement. Stress levels have increased in recent years, especially during and after the coronavirus pandemic. While theoretically, company leaderships impact only the stress levels experienced at work, the report states that greater engagement at work also reduces stress levels outside of it, in the employee's personal life. Furthermore, the level of engagement seems to be even more powerful in its relationship with stress than with workplace conditions related to the location.

Additionally, the level of engagement appears to be even more powerful in its relationship with stress than with workplace conditions related to the location, as can be seen in the graph below:

Regardless of the work style, whether remote, hybrid, or entirely in-person, the level of stress is inversely related to the level of engagement: the higher the engagement, the lower the stress, and the lower the engagement, the higher the stress.

Considering the disengaged workers, the report's survey found that 46% of these workers knew exactly what they would like to change in the work environment to make it better, and the responses are as follows:

• 41% would like to see changes in the area of engagement and company culture;

• 28% would like to see changes in the area of salary and benefits;

• 16% would like to see changes in the area of well-being.

Therefore, it seems quite clear that the challenge of the present in terms of employee experience and people management is engagement.

And if engagement is something directly linked to the area of people management, this all leads us to think: to what extent do company leaderships impact the lives of employees? How should this influence be managed? Should the change in the culture of engagement start with the employees or with the leadership itself?

According to the report, 70% of a team's engagement comes from the leader who manages it. But, what happens if many of these leaders are also demotivated?

We are living through an important moment of transitioning mindsets. Moving from a focus solely on profit at all costs, to an understanding that focusing on people will lead to greater profits and more quality of life and well-being for everyone. However, any global cultural change takes time.

This transition in the way we see the role of leadership and the way we build a company's culture is very much related to the transition of the very epistemology of science. If before, following the model of Descartes, we sought to fit the universe into determined and fixed boxes, today we know that very little of the universe is indeed stable and categorizable, as everything is, in fact, constantly in transformation. We live in an ambiguous, complex, and unstable universe. Science already recognizes this, and all other areas are also moving towards this level of understanding.

The transition in question is something we have been studying and implementing for some time at the DeRose Method, and it makes me very happy to see that more and more, we are all moving in this direction.

For the business world, this new model of thinking means:

• Reframing the purpose of work;

• Thought focused on profit + social impact + environmental impact;

• Diversity and inclusion taken seriously;

• Mental health on the agenda;

• Valuing the position of employees (skills and experiences) much more than the role and position;

• Freedom for different forms of work in the same organization;

• Break with obsolete HR practices;

• Abundance mindset and win/win thinking;

• Interdependence;

• Self-directed and organic learning;

• DAO’s (decentralized autonomous organizations);

• Agility;

• Innovation;

• Collaboration;

• Flexibility and adaptability.

These are characteristics that, according to the definition by John Bersin Company, define an "irresistible" organization, that is, an ideal place to work.

Lastly, what can be done to help companies move closer to this ideal?

My perspective is: training. Whenever we want to learn something new—like a motor skill, for example—we first need to understand it cognitively (the motor plan) before putting it into practice (the motor action) and then training it repeatedly until it becomes second nature.

Similarly, to implement a new organizational culture or transform a mindset, behavioral training is essential.

In my experience, this training should begin with leaders, because as we have seen, leaders have a significant impact on employees. At first glance, transforming an entire organization might seem overwhelming, but it’s a change that happens from the inside out. When training starts with the right people, the shift is catalyzed, and the process becomes an ongoing effort to sustain and manage what’s already in motion.

According to Stephen Covey in his book “The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People,” just as individuals have four dimensions of existence, a company must constantly renew and manage its dimensions:

• Physical: the company’s economy, revenue, profit;

• Emotional/Social: strong human relationships, how people are treated;

• Mental/Psychological: recognition, development, use of talent;

• Spiritual: purpose, clear objectives, organizational contribution, integrity.

Each area feeds into the others, and if one is neglected, it will negatively impact the rest. This is precisely what happens in a company that focuses solely on profit (the physical dimension), for example.

By considering these four dimensions, organizations can better understand how to launch training programs. This perspective helps identify strengths and weaknesses, providing clarity on how to begin the development process.

Therefore, a people management training program should use these four elements as the foundation to ensure that all aspects of the new management model are properly integrated.

In conclusion, I am optimistic about the changes taking place and eager to continue learning how to better connect the human development work I already do with the business world.

References:

“The Definite Guide: employee experiencie” da Josh Bersin Company. 

“State of the Global Workplace 2023 Report” da empresa Gallup. 

“O Futuro do Recrutamento 2023, insights do Brasil” do LinkedIn Talent Solutions.

“Future of Jobs Report 2023” do World Economic Forum. 

“HR 4.0: Shaping People Strategies in the Fourth Industrial Revolution”, do World Economic Forum. 

“Are we there yet? What’s next for HR?” do Dave Ulrich.

“Os 7 hábitos das pessoas altamente eficazes” do Stephen Covey