intake.insidedge.net

Years ago, as a young political reporter, I was sent from Chicago to cover the Republican National Convention in Houston. My editor decided I would have richer experiences to write about if I took Amtrak instead of flying. He wasn’t wrong. You see a lot of things sitting in coach class on a train for 28 hours. Not the least of which is how bad of an experience you can have if the crew assigned to your train would rather be anywhere else but on a 28-hour trek across the Heartland.

In just over one day’s time, I was chided, ridiculed and ignored by one porter after another. They refused to answer even the most basic questions.

“Can I have chicken for dinner?” (‘No MORE CHICKEN!’)

“How long is the layover in Dallas?” (No answer, but tosses a train schedule across the aisle at my chest).

While all that occurred nearly 20 years ago, I remember it clearly today. Which brings me to the point.

Over coffee today, I read one of the more puzzling blog posts I’ve ever seen – a piece called “3 Reasons Why Employee Engagement is a Scam” by CV Harquail.

Harquail shares a Towers Perrin definition of employee engagement that suggests engaged employees offer more discretionary effort than non-engaged employees. But Harquail argues that employees shouldn’t give discretionary effort, however, because they are rarely rewarded for it.

She concludes that the only real beneficiary of employee engagement is the company itself.

I disagree. In my view, employee engagement means listening to employees, hearing their concerns, addressing those that should or can be addressed. Explaining when they can’t or won’t be addressed. Employee engagement is about building a mutual respect between an organization and its people. Employee engagement is about building an emotional bond between employees and the company they work for. Employee engagement is about doing what’s good for the company by doing what’s good for the employee. Here are a few examples:

 - A professional services company learns from its annual employee survey that its people want more and better training opportunities. The company invests in improving its training programs. Employees feel better educated and well-rounded in their careers. The company benefits by having more satisfied, better-trained employees. Win-win.

- A struggling computer software company uses surveys and focus groups to learn that its employees are disenfranchised and likely to leave the company if the company’s executive leaders don’t more clearly define a vision of the future. The executives step up, involving employees in a conversation about new corporate strategy and brand. Employees rally behind their leaders and the company excels. Employees feel valued professionally and renew their bond to the company. Win-win.

- A financial services company develops plans to use the internet to supplement its agent-based sales force. But first, the company discusses the issue with its people in focus groups and regional meetings. The company adjusts its plans so that its sales force can also benefit from the internet-based sales.  The company sells more product, and the sales force earns more commission. Win-win.

These are but three examples from the past 15 years where my team and I have helped companies establish employee engagement programs that benefitted the company, its employees and its customers in one way or another.

Which brings me back to my cross-country train odyssey of 1992. In reality, the porters on that train did what I asked of them. They apprised me of the menu situation. They gave me information that let me know how much time I could spend in Dealy Plaza without missing the next leg of my journey. And they provided me with a lifetime of ammunition against ever riding the train anywhere again.

Now, there are many reasons why I can’t entirely blame those porters for their churlish behavior. I suspect their pay wasn’t that great. I can understand how riding the rails for days on end could get tedious. And some of my fellow passengers were less-than pleasant. But there might have been more at the root of the problem – perhaps they were not treated very well by their management either, or given a reason to care about their performance.

When I rode the train, I was in another line of work. But even then, I considered how things might have been different if those porters had been engaged in their work. I guess I might not be telling this story today.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, May 11th, 2010 at 4:39 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.