2. Peter Palme 1991-1995 Fraunhofer Institute IAO Stuttgart 1995-2002 Multinational Companies, Universities and EU (L&D Project Lead) 2002-2007 Nestlé (E-Learning Center of Excellence) 2007-2009 Dow Chemical (Talent Manager & HR BP) 2009- Syngenta (Head of L&D, EAME )
3. Group Owner and Moderator on Linkedin Fraunhofer AlumniPast & Present spaceship Linked:HR - EMEA 3350+ (Europe, Middle East, Africa)
5. Social Learning Myminimumrequirements: Learning fromothers (not in a formal groupsetting and not facilitated) Usinginteractive „mass“ Media such as a Web 2.0 application
6. Open Research Follow Wikipedia‘scurrentdefinition: Open research is research, conducted in the spirit of free and open source software
12. Doestheenvironment – type ofcompanyorofficehave a majorinfluence ?More details on project: http://ppalme.wordpress.com/2010/09/14/employee-engagement-impact-on-business-results-or-vice-versa/
i) Demonstrate that a change in understanding has taken place in the individuals involved. This may be at a surface level, e.g., via recall of new information, or deeper levels, e.g., demonstrated by change in attitudes, world views or epistemological beliefs; ii) Go beyond the individual to become situated within wider social units or communities of practice within society; and iii) Occur through social interactions and processes between actors within a social network, either through direct interaction, e.g., conversation, or through other media, e.g., mass media, telephone, or Web 2.0 applications.
Much like open source schemes that are built around a source code that is made public, the central theme of open research is to make clear accounts of the methodology, along with data and results extracted therefrom, freely available via the Internet. This permits a massively distributed collaboration.Most open research is conducted in existing research groups. Primary research data are posted which can be added to/interpreted by anybody who has the necessary expertise and who can therefore join the collaborative effort. Thus the 'end product' of the project arises from many contributions rather than the effort of one group. Open research is therefore distinct from open access in that the output of open research is mutable.[1] Issues of copyright are dealt with by either standard copyright or by releasing the content under licenses such as one of the Creative Commons Licence or one of the GNU General Public Licenses.
The opening anecdote relates Francis Galton's surprise that the crowd at a county fair accurately guessed the weight of an ox when their individual guesses were averaged (the average was closer to the ox's true butchered weight than the estimates of most crowd members, and also closer than any of the separate estimates made by cattle experts).[1]In 1906 Galton visited a livestock fair and stumbled upon an intriguing contest. An ox was on display, and the villagers were invited to guess the animal's weight after it was slaughtered and dressed. Nearly 800 gave it a go and, not surprisingly, not one hit the exact mark: 1,198 pounds. Astonishingly, however, the mean of those 800 guesses came close — very close indeed. It was 1,197 pounds.
The opening anecdote relates Francis Galton's surprise that the crowd at a county fair accurately guessed the weight of an ox when their individual guesses were averaged (the average was closer to the ox's true butchered weight than the estimates of most crowd members, and also closer than any of the separate estimates made by cattle experts).[1]In 1906 Galton visited a livestock fair and stumbled upon an intriguing contest. An ox was on display, and the villagers were invited to guess the animal's weight after it was slaughtered and dressed. Nearly 800 gave it a go and, not surprisingly, not one hit the exact mark: 1,198 pounds. Astonishingly, however, the mean of those 800 guesses came close — very close indeed. It was 1,197 pounds.
Employee Engagement impact on Business Results or vice versa ?By ppalme Is engagement the right measurement to predict future business success or is it the result of the current success of the company that leads to increased employee engagement ? Is there a better factor to measure and to react on ?According to a study in the 90s at Sears found that ten items on their seventy item employee survey would predict customer satisfaction and, ultimately, revenue. Reference: Effron, Marc; Ort, Miriam: One Page Talent Management; Harvard Business Press, Page 107.On the opposite a large study published in 2003 that looked at thirty-five companies over eight years found that a company’s performance (earning per share and return on assets) predicted employee satisfaction more strongly than satisfaction predicted performance. Reference: Effron, Marc; Ort, Miriam: One Page Talent Management; Harvard Business Press, Page 112.How to solve this dilema ?A recent study of Harvard professor Teresa Amabileof several hundred workers over few years who tracked their day to day activities and rated their motivations and emotions daily showed that making progress in one’s work — even incremental progress — is more frequently associated with positive emotions and high motivation than any other workday event. Reference: http://www.danpink.com/archives/2009/12/harvard-business-review-on-what-really-motives-workers.This latest finding could open up a new way of understanding engagement. Instead of asking 300 questions maybe just two question will help predict the future performance of acompany.The first question to ask is on a scale from 1-10 how are you making progress in your work in the current work environment you are in and the second question I would base on the Net Promoter Score (1-10) developed by Fred Reichheld: How likely is that you would recommend your current company to others as a place to work ?Based on these two questions I have created an open survey on employee engagement and business correlation.The results as stated below can be used by any researcher in this area. (see description below)1) Link to survey: https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dFNyZkJDNmRZU0NJeTB1d0J6VVU5Mnc6MQ2) Graphical Representation of the results: https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewanalytics?formkey=dFNyZkJDNmRZU0NJeTB1d0J6VVU5Mnc6MQ3) The results of the survey in spreadsheet format: https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0ArQI1UCaBIHOdFNyZkJDNmRZU0NJeTB1d0J6VVU5Mnc&hl=enYou may use the results of this survey for your own analysis under the condition that you explicitly state the source of the data by including the link to this survey and the link to the survey results in your analysis and or publications. This is an anonymous survey. Do not use any means or make any conclusions to associate the data to persons or organizations. The survey was created by Peter Palme only www.linkedin.com/in/peterpalme and has no association to my current employer.
The opening anecdote relates Francis Galton's surprise that the crowd at a county fair accurately guessed the weight of an ox when their individual guesses were averaged (the average was closer to the ox's true butchered weight than the estimates of most crowd members, and also closer than any of the separate estimates made by cattle experts).[1]In 1906 Galton visited a livestock fair and stumbled upon an intriguing contest. An ox was on display, and the villagers were invited to guess the animal's weight after it was slaughtered and dressed. Nearly 800 gave it a go and, not surprisingly, not one hit the exact mark: 1,198 pounds. Astonishingly, however, the mean of those 800 guesses came close — very close indeed. It was 1,197 pounds.
