If there is anything that I have learned during my career thus far it is that change is constant. Over the past ten months, my team has undergone two monumental restructures. Although I believe that both of these changes have been for the best, the change itself was not easy.
While recently reviewing “Leadership Sustainability” by Dave Ulrich, I came across several key takeaways that are simple yet very powerful. Even though I didn’t have this content as I went in to the recent restructures, I realized that the process that my team was following was very similar to several of the key principles identified in the book. However, there is one that we haven’t quite mastered as well as the others.
The book identifies five rules of the Leadership Code:
- Shape the future
- Make things happen
- Engage today’s talent
- Build the next generation
- Invest in yourself
They sound simple enough, right? I thought so, too.
Throughout the organizational changes that we’ve recently undergone, I’ve found that keeping my team engaged is proving to be harder than I initially anticipated. Through a series of meetings, surveys and conversations, I have identified a few areas that I believe are at the root of the issue.
The first area that I’ve identified is a strong sense of community. Even though the majority of my team does have a strong sense of community, for some, that community factor is missing. For these few individuals, they remain distant and do not take initiative to interact with other members of the team besides the required interactions for various projects that they are working on.
The second area that stands out is recognition. Each individual craves different forms of recognition and several members of my team were looking for additional recognition. I’ve found that complements and encouragement is one of the easiest ways to boost a team member’s confidence. However, for some, they feel most rewarded when they are recognized for their work in front of others. Therefore, I’ve been intentional lately to try to recognize people using a combination of the two. I’ve noticed that team members really appreciate this and will take action to try to remain in the spotlight when they know that they will be recognizing for their efforts.
The third area that my team struggles with from time to time is cultural differences. Our company has a very strong corporate culture that is conservative in nature. However, many members of our team have beliefs that differ from the cultural norms. I highly value these differences in thought and encourage members to always be themselves. However, that is much easier said than done and team members can easily become disengaged when the culture doesn’t align well with their own views.
I’m curious to know if other organizations struggle with keeping their teams engaged in the company and the work that they’re doing. If so, is it for similar reasons that I’ve described and what ways have you discovered that work well for keeping them better engaged?
I would also mention that keeping open lines of communication (two-ways) is a very good way to keep people engaged. There is nothing more discouraging than being out of the loop and not understanding the purpose of the tasks you are working on.
Brent
I find it fascinating that you have identified a misalignment with culture as driver of disengagement and I agree completely. How can an employee truly be engaged with a team if they do not feel that they even fit within the larger picture of the firm. I find that occasionally will disengage from my work and my team if my attitude towards the direction and culture of my organization sours, which, as you know from many of our conversations, is frequently. Not only do I fight this personal battle, but I also struggle with keeping my team engaged for many of the same reasons. I have found, however, that if I am able to demonstrate an honest interest in the valuable assets that an employee brings the organization, some of this disengagement can be mitigated. Generally I have found that this is most easily accomplished by maintaining and insisting on a collaborative work environment and the requirement that one employee or group of employees dominate the message.