Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

GALLUP UNIVERSITY SAIC Engagement Every Day: 2011 Engagement Survey – Business Impact Analysis (BIA)

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "GALLUP UNIVERSITY SAIC Engagement Every Day: 2011 Engagement Survey – Business Impact Analysis (BIA)"— Presentation transcript:

1 GALLUP UNIVERSITY SAIC Engagement Every Day: Engagement Survey – Business Impact Analysis (BIA)

2 Engagement Helps To Drive Better SAIC Business Performance
Higher Engagement Lower Total and Voluntary Turnover Higher Revenue and PBT % to Plan = Increase in Engagement More Likely to Beat Previous Year’s Revenue and PBT % to Plan = Notes: Over the last two administrations of the survey three primary themes linking division business results with engagement scores have emerged. 1. Divisions that had higher engagement levels experienced lower levels of total and voluntary turnover. These divisions also experienced higher percent to plan on their revenue and “Profit before Tax” goals. 2. Divisions that improved their engagement scores between the and 2009 survey also beat their previous year’s revenue percent to plan and their “profit before tax” percent to plan goals. 3. Workgroups that took action on issues identified through the survey experienced the highest amount of positive change on their engagement scores. = Effective Action Planning Higher Engagement Scores Copyright © 2010 Gallup, Inc. All rights reserved.

3 Divisions That Achieved Meaningful
Divisions That Achieved Meaningful* GrandMean Growth Between the 2007 & 2009 Survey Improved Their Financial Performance Revenue % to Plan** PBT % to Plan** -29.6% -6.6% -5.2% Notes: Revenue% to Plan chart Divisions that experienced a positive increase in their GrandMean scores from the 2007 survey to the 2009 survey on average also experienced an 11% increase in their revenue % to plan when compared to their previous year’s results. Conversely, those divisions that had a decrease in their GrandMean score also experienced a decrease in achievement of revenue goals from the previous year. PBT % to Plan chart The analysis of divisions’ achievement of financial goals for 2009 and 2010 and corresponding engagement survey GrandMean scores showed that: Those divisions which had an increase in GrandMean from 2007 to 2009 were closer to achieving their PBT% to Plan than those who had a decrease in the survey GrandMean scores. GRANDMEAN CHANGE Decreased/STS = Increased=.421 Meaningful Increase/Decrease +/- .20 *Meaningful Increase/Decrease is defined as GM growth of +/- .20 or more **Based on non-weighted averages across units in group Copyright © 2010 Gallup, Inc. All rights reserved.

4 The Three Types of Employees
28% 53% 19% Engaged Not Engaged Actively Disengaged Loyal and psychologically committed. More productive, higher retention. Notes: Gallup research has shown that those individuals in the Engaged category are strongly connected to the organization they work for. They tend to be more productive and are loyal to their organization. The employees in the Not Engaged category are not as enthusiastic about the company they work for, they tend to be a bit indifferent to their employer as a whole, they do their job and do what they are told to do but will not go above and beyond the call of duty. The final group is what Gallup calls the Actively Disengaged . These employees are very unhappy with their work environment and tend to work against the organization by creating negativity in their environments and attempting to recruit others into their negative thinking. As you work with this data keep the following things in mind: Avoid the Danger of Labeling. Think of these groups of employees like this: Most employees join companies with hopes and dreams for a great experience; most employees come to work with good intentions; and most employees WANT to do a good job, contribute, and be recognized & appreciated for it . For Engaged employees, things are going right. They are right there, ready to be your role models, cheerleaders, tone setters, culture drivers. Not Engaged employees are frequently on the fence, but they need something to change. They have the most potential and are most responsive to actions toward change. They want action and help to become engaged. Actively Disengaged didn’t join the company that way, but something has been lost or happened along the way. Give them the benefit of the doubt and work with them to jointly create a working culture that they want to become part of – or eventually select out. Productive, but they are not psychologically connected to their company. Miss more workdays, more likely to leave. Physically present, but psychologically absent. Unhappy and insist on sharing this unhappiness with others. Based on Gallup Poll: US Working Population 2010 Copyright ® 2008 Gallup, Inc. All rights reserved. 4

5 Actively Disengaged Employees Turnover at 3x the Rate of Engaged Employees
Days Since 2009 Administration Voluntary Turnover 12% 12% 6% 6% 4% 4% Notes: This is what Gallup refers to as a survivor analysis. To complete this analysis Gallup looked at those employees from the 2009 employee survey, who fell into each of the 3 categories: Engaged Not Engaged Actively Disengaged The graph shows both the percentage of employees in each category that turned over as well as the number of days the employees remained employed following the 2009 survey, up to the point the analysis ended. The findings highlight the strong relationship that exists between employee turnover and engagement. Not only do a higher percentage of Actively Disengaged employees terminate employment but they also are leaving the organization faster than the Not Engaged and Engaged employees. This is very consistent with Gallup’s research with other organizations. Copyright © 2010 Gallup, Inc. All rights reserved.

6 SAIC’s Engagement Index Over Time
Ratio* of Engaged to Actively Disengaged: Recommendation is a 4.00:1 ratio 2.00:1 3.36:1 3.08:1 3.38:1 Notes: This slide show the trending Engagement Index for SAIC over the last three employee surveys. As you can see, SAIC experienced good movement from 2007 to 2009, however, in 2011 the results were nearly identical to the results of 2009. This year’s results (2011) show that 37% of the population at SAIC is categorized as Engaged, 51% as Not Engaged, and 12% as Actively Disengaged. Gallup’s research indicates that for an organization to offset the negative effects of one actively disengaged employee it takes about 4 engaged employees. It is, therefore, recommended that an organization aim to achieve a 4.00:1 ratio. SAIC currently has a ratio of 3.08:1 ration. This means there are just over three (3) engaged employees for every one (1) actively disengaged employee. * The Engagement Ratio calculates the percentage of employees who fall into one of three categories: Engaged, Not Engaged, and Actively Disengaged 6 Copyright © 2011 Gallup, Inc. All rights reserved.

7 Supervisors and Workgroups Who Follow Through on Actions Drive Engagement
Workgroups that made “progress” showed greater improvement in engagement n=667 n=252 n=111 n=40 Notes: This slide is based upon the latest employee survey findings from In order to create this slide Gallup broke out workgroups into one of 4 quartiles depending solely on that workgroups’ score on the 3 accountability index item s(3 items that measure follow through). As you may recall the third question asks, “My team has made progress on the goals set during our action planning sessions after the last Employee Engagement Survey.” This question has been found to be a great indicator of whether a workgroup perceives they are taking steps in the right direction to improve their work environment ,or not. Top Graph: As the graph illustrates, if a workgroup received high marks on this question (ranking in the top 25% of Gallup’s database) they on average increased their GrandMean score by +.22 from Conversely, if a team ranked in the bottom quartile (bottom 25%) on this question they, on average, experienced a GrandMean decrease of -.12 from 2007. Bottom Graph: This graph shows the GrandMean for SAIC overall,which is the top line. The bottom line is the overall score for SAIC on the three Accountability Index items. The Three Accountability Index items are (paraphrasing); (1) I received feedback on the results, (2) I participated in an effective action plan session, and (3) my team has made progress on goals. As you can see on this graph, both the Accountability Index scores and the overall GrandMean score for the organization remained nearly unchanged. These two measurements will continue to grow in similar fashion. The amount of growth an organization can expect to see in regard to its overall GrandMean is closely tied to the amount of response or improvement employees perceive has been achieved since the last survey. Put simply, organizations that act on the results in ways that employees perceive as making progress will experience the most amount of improvement. The GrandMean growth trajectory will mirror accountability growth Copyright © 2011 Gallup, Inc. All rights reserved.

Download ppt "GALLUP UNIVERSITY SAIC Engagement Every Day: 2011 Engagement Survey – Business Impact Analysis (BIA)"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google