Many decisions that organisations make about their people are made using employee engagement survey data. But “employee engagement is a tricky customer, often seen as contentious and woolly” (CIPD 2021). So, in this session we explore the outcomes of employee engagement and develop guidance on how to best think about it and measure it robustly. This session is aimed at HR & Organisational Development professionals looking to: - Gain further insight into their employee survey data - Using employee survey data to drive performance & change - Gain insight into the future of employee surveys - Put people insights at the centre of their decision making The session will cover: - Why are employee surveys important? - What do we really mean by Employee Engagement? - What are the predictors of organisational performance & change? - What measurements should we be using? - How to understand the key drivers of change within your organisation - Using employee survey data to drive change & performance - What is the future of employee surveys?

1. Making Sense of Employee Survey Data
An Evidenced Based Approach
Join the conversation 11-12pm 20th May 2022
This talk is aimed at HR & Organisational Development professionals to help
them navigate their employee surveys & find out more about their future
Presented by Alex Boulting

3. Who am I & Why me ?
MEMBER – MINSTLM
FELLOW – CIPD

4. Today’s Session

5. Are we with employee engagement?
WHERE?
1

6. Construct = an abstract categorisation of observations - exist only in our brain ;)
This is not a pipe
The Treachery of Employee Engagement

7. Is this a Valid Construct…?
COHERENCE
Definition + Scope + Relationship = Coherence and CONSTRUCT VALIDITY. How can we claim to
measure & improve if we don’t have a valid construct?
RELATIONSHIP
No construct is an island so how does engagement relate to Self Determination, Goal Setting,
Psychological Safety, Organisational Justice, Trust in Leadership, Autonomy, Efficacy, Resilience, ‘Good
Work’ etc
SCOPE
Which one - happiness, motivation, energy, effort, commitment, shared purpose, taking pride in the
organisation and job satisfaction
DEFINITION
Precise distinctions from other concepts. Employee Engagement = “when employees are engaged with
their jobs” – a circular tautology or clear definition? 50 definitions!
Suddaby, R. 2010. Construct clarity in theories of management and organization. Academy of Management Review, 35: 346-357.

8. 50 different definitions !
Is it a…
•Behaviour e.g. discretionary effort
•Attitude e.g. commitment
•Feeling e.g. enthusiasm
•Condition of work e.g. support (Gallup Q12)

9. NPS was conceived by customer loyalty
consultant Fred Reicheld in 2003 & is
calculated by subtracting ‘detractors’
from ‘promoters’.
With little robust empirical research, it
was soon adopted by large corporates
& advocated by HBR (“The One
Number You Need To Grow”).
Because NPS or word of mouth (WOM)
is trying to measure so many variables it
is hard to link it to revenue growth.
Engagement isn’t eNPS

10. Happy with work conditions Engaged Employees
Started as workplace conditions audit (Gallup Workplace Audit) in 1992
Drivers of Disengagement Drivers of Engagement
Disengaged
Engaged
Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Keyes, C. L. (2003). Well-being in the workplace and its relationship to business outcomes: A review of the Gallup studies.
“Undermining engaged employees”
“Drive high performance & innovation”
Productive Workers
Engaged Employees
What does say ?

11. What does say ?
• Self Determination Theory
• Psychological Safety
• Goal Setting
• Management Support
• Workload
• Recognition Reward
• Organisational Fit
• Strategy
• Progress Principle
• ‘Learning Culture’
• Meaningful Work
• eNPS
Valid Measures ?

12. “In less technical terms, we can say that even if they are
all of interest, averaging distinct measures into an
overarching score does not produce any magic. If we
bundle disparate things together, we get a potpourri or
mosh-pit of metrics: so much is going on that we can’t
really interpret it. “ CIPD 2021
‘…the most common way to measure engagement is by a
group of survey items that include measures of
satisfaction, effort, and commitment to the organisation; in
other words, a potpourri of items looking at different types
of attitudes that have different relationships to
performance.’ Lawler 2013
Issues with
Composite Scores

13. So what?
“Nearly 85% of employees worldwide are still not engaged or are actively disengaged at work, despite more
effort from companies”. – GALLUP 2021

14. Is Employee Engagement Important?
WHY?
2

15. 1950s 1960s 1980s
1970s 1990s 2000s 2010s 2020s
1940s
From Kurt Lewin (1943) to
Paul Lawrence (1958)
change and organisational
development is conceived as
a set of causal relationships
within a ‘social system’ built
on scientific constructs.
Allport (1937) ‘functional
autonomy’ & Maslow’s (1943)
‘general dynamic theory’
integrate psychological &
physiological approaches to
human motivation.
White 1959 uses the words
‘competence & efficacy’ to
describe the human need to
‘‘learn to interact effectively
with his environment’
Forrester (1961) - publishes
Industrial Dynamics which
views organisations as complex
systems.
Burns & Stalker (1961) – find
that less structured
organisations can better adapt
to dynamic environments
1965 Emery & Trist view
organisations as ‘open systems’
responding to ‘environmental
textures’
Katz & Kahn (1966) develop an
‘open-system theory’ of
organisations.
Current robust OD constructs
emerge such as Dansereau’s
(1973) – Leader Member
Exchange, Bandura 1977 –
Self- Efficacy & Gouldner,
1960 (Reciprocity) Social
Exchange Theory
Brief history of organisational change & development
Meta Analysis & Myth Busting
Scientific Approach to OD Complex Systems Approach to OD Explosion of OD constructs
OD constructs consolidated into
more general theories such as
Ryan & Deci (1985) Self
Determination Theory, Theory of
Planned Behaviour Lock &
Latham (1988) Goal Setting while
new theories emerge such as
Kahn (1990) Psychological Safety
& Employee Engagement,
Weick’s (1995) Organisational
Sensemaking help to build the
foundations of modern OD
thinking.
Meta analysis techniques help to
create robust OD constructs such
as Self-Efficacy (Stajkovic &
Luthans-1998), Organisational
Justice (Colquitt et al 2013) Trust
in Leadership (Dirks & Ferrin -
2002), Psychological Safety
(Frazier et al 2017)
Academics start to question the
foundations of traditional
organisational OD models e.g.,
Hughes (2015) critiques Kotter &
Cummings et al (2015) questions
the Lewin’s UCF theory Dennis
Tourish ( 2019) ‘Authentic’
Leadership, Rob Briner Employee
Engagement (2015)
Mcgregor’s (1957) X-Y
theory ‘operationalises’
Maslow’s theory

16. 02
Rudolf Kalman – 1963 – Control Theory
1st Principle of Complex Systems - ENERGY
‘tension’ as a readiness for action or motivating force or energy
which is created by a need (motive) that is released once that need is
met
Kurt Lewin – 1943 – Field Theory
“We could say a system is controllable if we can drive it from any
initial state to any desired final state in finite time”
“The complex system has a multiplicity of interacting feedback loops.
Its internal rates of flow are controlled by nonlinear relationships”
Jay Forrester – 1961 – Industrial Dynamics
01
03

17. William Kahn
Kahn (1990) Psychological Safety & Employee Engagement
Psychological meaningfulness can be seen as a feeling that one is receiving a return on
investments of one's self in a currency of physical, cognitive, or emotional energy
behaviors by which people bring in (engagement) or leave out (disengagement) their personal
selves during work role performances.
I defined personal engagement as the harnessing of organization members' selves to their work
roles; in engagement
This formulation reflects concepts of how people invest themselves in tasks (Hackman &
Oldham, 1980)
“
”

18. Numerosity
Disorder & Diversity
Feedback
Non-equilibrium
18
10 characteristics of Complex Systems
Spontaneous order and Self organisation
Non-linearity
Robustness
Nested Structure & modularity
History & memory
Adaptive behaviour
Emergence
Ladyman, J., & Wiesner, K. (2020). What is a complex system?. Yale University Press.

19. Does the evidence say about employee
engagement?
WHAT…?
3

20. Evidence Review of Definitions
Framework Number of Studies
Balance of Demands (-ive) & Resources (+ive)
(JD-R model)
65
Employees exert effort if they are treated well (Social Exchange Theory) 26
Acquire and preserve resources (energy)
(Conservation of Resources Theory)
14
Individuals experience positive emotions
(Broaden & Build Theory)
8
Bailey, C., Madden, A., Alfes, K., Fletcher, L., Robinson, D., Holmes, J., ... & Currie, G. (2015). Evaluating the evidence on employee engagement and its potential benefits to NHS staff:
a narrative synthesis of the literature. Health Services and Delivery Research, 3(26), 1-424.

21. A definition?
• Vigor is characterized by high levels of energy and mental resilience while
working, the willingness to invest effort in one’s work, and persistence even
in the face of difficulties.
• Dedication refers to being strongly involved in one’s work and experiencing
a sense of significance, enthusiasm, inspiration, pride, and challenge.
• Absorption is characterized by being fully concentrated and happily
engrossed in one’s work, whereby time passes quickly and one has
difficulties with detaching oneself from work.

22. ENGAGEMENT
At my work, I feel bursting with
energy
I am enthusiastic about my job
I am immersed in my work
I successfully manage a high
workload for long periods of
time
RESILIENCE
BURNOUT
I feel tired when I get up in the
morning & have to face another
day at work
I am at the end of my patience
at the end of my workday.
I’m afraid that this job is making
me uncaring.
DOES ENGAGEMENT = Physical + Emotional + Cognitive ENERGY ?
A readiness to do work (but no necessarily Employee Engagement ;)
WELLBEING
I have felt active and vigorous
I have felt cheerful and in good
spirits
My daily life has been filled with
things that interest me
Spot the difference?
Maslach Burnout Inventory Employee Resilience Scale
WHO 5
Utrecht Work Engagement Scale

23. A broader definition…
A
Work Motivation
C
Employee’s sense of
belonging to the
organisation
Organisational
Identification B
Organisational
Commitment
Wietrak, E., Rousseau, D. and Barends, E. (2021) Work motivation, Organisational Identification & Organisational Commitment : an evidence review. Scientific summary. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.
Goal Setting
Feedback
Person-
Organisational Fit
Organisational
Prestige
A+B+C
Employee
Engagement
Recognition
Rewards
Meaning
Empowerment
Social Support
Psychological Safety
Task & Skill Variety
Energy levels within
the organisation.
Employee emotional
attachment to the
organisation
Employee energy to do
work & attain a goal
Role Clarity
Leadership : Trust &
Positive Relationships
Organisational Justice
Belonging
Uniqueness
Affective
Commitment

24. Building an Inclusive Culture
Differentiation
Exclusion Assimilation
Individual is not treated as an
organisational insider in the work group,
but their unique characteristics are seen
as valuable and required for
group/organisational success
Individual is not treated as an
organisational insider with unique value
in the work group but there are other
employees or groups who are insiders
Individual is treated as an insider in the
work group when the conform to the
organisational/dominant culture norms
and downplay uniqueness
UNIQENESS
–
Drive
to
stand
out
BELONGING - Drive to fit in (Cohesion)
Shore, Lynn & Randel, Amy & Chung, Beth & Dean, Michelle & Ehrhart, Karen & Singh, Gangaram. (2011). Inclusion and Diversity in Work Groups: A Review and Model for Future Research. Journal of
Management.
Inclusive cultures are those where
uniqueness and belonging come
together
When an individual’s unique
characteristics are accepted into a
group it improves performance
while creating a sense of
belonging
These feelings of psychological
safety where people feel safe
taking interpersonal risks are
critical to building inclusive
cultures
(Separation)
Inclusion
Individual is treated as an insider and
allowed/encouraged to retain uniqueness
within the work group .

25. Academics v Practitioners

26. Do we bring it all together & move forward?
HOW…?
4

27. 2
OCCATM - OUR THEORY OF CHANGE
WORK CONTRACT WORK-LIFE BALANCE
EMPLOYEE VOICE JOB DESIGN RELATIONSHIPS WELLBEING
IMPACT OUTPUTS INPUTS
GOAL SETTING PSYCHOLOGICAL
SAFETY
FAIRNESS
CHANGE CAPABILITY
FEEDBACK

28. ‘IT/ME’
Knowledge
Skills
Attitude
Behaviour
‘ITS/US’
Policy/Processes
Systems
Org Design
Org Strategy
‘WE’
Culture
Relationships
Language
Stories
‘I’
Beliefs
Values
Self-awareness
Mindset
EQ
Subjective
Intersubjective Interobjective
Objective
4 perspective

29. 2
OCCA Introduction
UNIQUENESS
Drive to flourish
DOING External Perspective
BELONGING–
Drive to belong
BEING Internal Perspective
Behaviour is manifested as
a decision to act which
clearly impacts change
momentum & direction.
Connects individual
intentions, beliefs, emotions
& assumptions
to action
What I Do & How I Do It
Habitualised behaviours
have a high symbolic impact
on change through
organisational structures,
processes & systems.
Connects individual
behaviours to an
organisation’s purpose.
What We Do & How We Do
It
Social context interprets
beliefs & behaviours in
relation to others creating
wide cultural meaning of
change.
Connects individual’s
identity to organisational
culture.
Why We Do & What We
Experience
Cognitive contemplation of
how deep the individual’s
commitment to change is.
Connects to an individual's
intentions, beliefs, emotions
& assumptions
Why I Do & What I
Experience

30. Creating an inclusive culture
Individual
Identity
Organisational
Identity
Reflecting on behaviour
Express identity
‘I’ ‘ME’
Habits embed culture
Cultural understanding
‘WE’ ‘US’
UNIQUENESS
Drive to flourish
DOING –
External Perspective
BELONGING–
Drive to belong
BEING –
Internal Perspective

31. 3
COMPLEX SYSTEMS… CAN BE SIMPLIFIED
HOW IT WORKS - Once we know the target culture
Low Score
High Priority
High Impact

32. 2
2
5
4
1
1
3
4
1
1
3
1
1
SELF –
Drive to flourish
OTHERS –
Drive to belong
DOING –
External Perspective
BEING –
Internal Perspective
AUTHOR OF MY LIFE
LEARNING ORGANISATION
UNLEASHING POTENTIAL
PURPOSE DRIVEN
Blind spot on
individual
wellbeing & D&I
(values & beliefs)
Lots of
questions but
not capturing
collaboration
80% or more of
respondents
Overall Positive
Between 50 -
80% of
respondents
Overall Positive
Example Audit

33. 33
MODEL FOR BUILDING TRUST
TRUST
=
Consideratio
n & Structure
Psychological
Contract Breach
Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for
research and practice. Journal of applied psychology, 87(4), 611.

34. Precontemplation
I won’t or I can’t
Contemplation
I might
Preparation
I will
Action
I am
Realise
‘small wins’ to build
belief
Embed
and habitualise
change behaviours
Understand
the need & readiness
for change
Develop
compelling vision &
leadership capability
Implement
evidence-based
interventions
Support
enabling practices &
structures
Maintenance
I still am
Individual Change Process
Organisational Change Process
PULSE PULSE
PULSE PULSE
Creating high performing cultures
Operational
level
Strategic
level

35. SOLUTIONEERING
The problem is not that we don’t have a
solution. The problem is we don’t know
what the problem is.

36. REVIEW
6
5 2
4
1
3
SHARE stories
of what did(n’t)
work
INTERVENE
Select & run
interventions based
on best available
evidence
SURVEY – cast
the net wide
using valid
constructs
DO PLAN
PRIORITISE
improvements given
strategy, scores &
feedback
PULSE
priorities to test
intervention
effectiveness
CONSULT
stakeholders on
results to
understand
context
6 Top Tips for Employee Engagement
Need to think of
(dis)engagement as
temporarily & we are
continually understanding
how the context we are
creating helps people to fulfil
their & the organisations
potential

37. 6 Benefits of Being Evidence-Based
Clarity & robustness of decision-making
allows organisations to quickly respond to
external challenges
.
AGILITY 01
as it creates a process to
understand & interrogate
decision-making
CONFIDENCE 06
because decision-making
processes have integrity &
gravitas
TRUST 02
Creates transparency &
objectivity around decision-
making
FAIRNESS 05
clear decision-making
structures creates efficacy,
agency & autonomy
EMPOWERMENT 03
to organisational values such as respect &
fairness
CONGRUENCE 04

38. AND ...
Thank you!
from Alex
Boulting
Owner | ebbnflow
+44 7562570000
alex@ebbnflow.co.u
k
www.ebbnflow.co.u
k
Stay tuned and check our newest videos on YouTube: