In a recent article in the ExecuNet Newsletter ("Market intelligence and insight for maximizing executive talent management") written by Joe McCool, I was struck by how important the difference between "engagement" and "satisfaction" is. I was also struck by how significant that difference is to every kind of organization, and for every level of employee in that organization.
Here's what Joe wrote:
"The second annual Executive Retention Report by ExecuNet and Finnegan Mackenzie found that over 90 percent of U.S. CEOs and other management leaders believe an executive can be engaged in their work and with their employer but still open to considering new career opportunities. This was reflected in their attitudes about their own sense of engagement and job satisfaction.
Exactly 93 percent of CEOs, presidents and top business executives report they're engaged in their current role, but only 75 percent say they're actually satisfied with it. Also, roughly 7-in-10 other 'C-Suite' executives and others at the vice president, director and manager levels are likewise engaged in their day-to-day work, but only 5-in-10 say they feel a sense of overall job satisfaction.
"Companies should take the time now to consider how their potential failure to retain their best management executives will weigh on corporate productivity, financial results and succession plans in the coming year," says ExecuNet's Mark Anderson. "Even before this recovery takes full effect, it's clear that surprisingly high numbers of executives are restless and eager to explore what a more growth-oriented economy has in store for them."
Further, Anderson commented, "If companies can't retain their executive leaders and don't have the right teams in place, they simply won't reach their business objectives for the coming year. For that reason, retention risk should be on the corporate agenda now."
To stave off key executive defections, says Richard Finnegan, principal of Finnegan Mackenzie - The Retention Firm, and author of Rethinking Retention In Good Times And Bad, companies should consider conducting 'stay interviews' to rebuild trust with key business leaders, get them re-engaged and explore what the company could do to increase their job satisfaction, and get them focused on the potential upside of staying."
Having 50% of your organizations' leadership satisfied with their job obviously means that 50% are not satisfied. That will affect productivity, morale and the company culture in a negative way. It's easy to understand how improving satisfaction on the job (at every level) will increase productivity, morale and culture. It will also make the employee happier and much more likely to stay for the longer term.
The idea of "stay interviews" is so simple . . . and so powerful. Why are employers so afraid of actually spending some time intereacting and getting to know their employees? The result o that interview doesn't necessarily have to mean additional 'expense' for the employer. My bet is that employees would be thrilled to have a "real" conversation about their professional goals with their boss. I think the idea behind having the conversation would have significant value in itself.
I've previously written about the "restlessness" of employees at the moment (resulting from their feelings of overwork and undervalue). I've written about how important succession planning is, at every level of the organization. The ExecuNet article is just more evidence of how consistently proactive organizations must be to maintain (or create) a healthy culture.
Are you engaged or satisfied? If you had the opportunity to sit down with your boss for some personal career planning, would you know what you'd like to ask for (beyond more money and/or time off)?