Presentation on theme: "Unleash engagement in multicultural organisations:"— Presentation transcript:
1Unleash engagement in multicultural organisations: Inclusivity as the key to sustainable business transformationPresentation at 29th International OD Congress
2Rica Viljoen Doctor in Business Leadership (SBL Unisa) International Organisational Development specialist and practitioner focusing on optimising individual, group and organisational behaviourFocus on creating Engagement in multi-cultural organisations through InclusivityConsulted to and facilitated in various countries e.g. Califoria, Peru,Australia, Spain, Zambia, Mali, Tanzania, Namibia, Zambia, GhanaAssociated with numerous academic institutions as subject matter expert e.g. da Vinci Institute, SBL – UNISA and Village of Leaders – StellenboschManaging Director of Mandala Consulting
3Francois De KockMasters in Commerce (Industrial Psychology), Stellenbosch UniversityPhD Candidate, Erasmus University of Rotterdam, NetherlandsLecturer in Strategic Human Resource Management & PsychometricsIndustrial Psychologist (HPCSA)Business associate of various organisations in R&D consultingPartnered with Mandala Consulting to do statistical analysis for Benchmark of Engagement (BeQ) measurement instrument (from 2009)
4Layout of presentation Unleash engagement in multicultural organisations: Inclusivity as the key to sustainable business transformationIntroductionTheory on Engagement and InclusivityUnleashing tacit potential in systemsBenefits of EngagementBenchmark of Engagement (BeQ)Case study: Mine in AfricaValidation of BeQNext steps of Development of BeQConclusionsQuestions
5Unleash engagement in multicultural organisations: IntroductionUnleash engagement in multicultural organisations:Inclusivity as the key to sustainable business transformationIn today’s competitive, ever changing world, companies strive harder than ever to implement strategy in a sustainable manner and to stay recent in the mind of the global consumer.The people capacity in the system and the interaction between human entities lead to the “amount of energy” in a system to perform.This energy can lead to engaged individuals – a situation where the tacit potential of an individual manifests and is applied to organisational tasks to the benefit of the individual, the group and the organisation.Other forms of energy is “apathetic” or “disconnected” with obvious human losses of human potential.Engagement leads to organisational benefits such as customer centricity, productivity, safe behaviour, low turnover and low absenteeism.Leaders in organisations should understand the art of facilitating employee engagement.
6Theory on EngagementEmployee Engagement is defined (Corporate Leadership Council, 2004:3) as the “positive emotional connection to an employee’s work, thus affective, normative and continuance commitment” and "a heightened emotional connection that an employee feels for his or her organisation, that influences him or her to exert greater discretionary effort to his or her work".Ek dink ons moet dalk die eerste sin the “positive emotional connection to an employee’s work, thus affective, normative and continuance commitment” uithaal want dit definieer commitment, en commitment en engagement is nie dieselfde ding nie. Dalk kan ons net die tweede gedeelte van die definisie behou? Of dalk definisie van Behavioural Engagement uit Macey et al (2008) uithaal. Ek dink dat die bron met die meeste ‘credibility’ van engagement sal die Macey artikel wees, of ook Schaefeli en Bakker, of Salgado ook. Dis vir my belangrik dat ons die ‘conceptual clarity’ behou want hierdie area is maar ‘tricky’, al die konstrukte klink soos mekaar. Stem jy saam met hierdie voorstel, of het jy dalk ander?
7Inclusivity through Engagement – Viljoen (2008) Sustainability thorough Inclusivity - energy on all dimensionsIndividualOD InterventionsEQ JourneyState EngagementTrait EngagementBehavioral EngagementGroupDialoguingLeadershipWork attributesAppreciative InquiryStorytellingOrganisational LeadershipTrustWorld CafeOrganisationThe WhatEngagement /CommitmentDoingContext:IndustrySouth AfricaAfricaGlobalTheIndividualLeadershipHow individuals changeApathyTheTeamInclusivityTheOrganisationRica, hierdie model is omvattend en dui aan hoe al die prosesse op mekaar inwerk. Ek gaan bietjie devil’s advocate speelFont is nie in al die blokkies dieselfde nie, tipe en grootte en bold, centered, ens.Die heading moet meer prominent wees. Dit lyk nou soos deel van die model.Die heading klink nie baie beskrywend van wat op die skyfie aangedui word nie. Bv. Factors leading to engagement? Of is dit die Inlcusivity model of engagement? Die ‘energy on all dimensions’ kan dalk die ISTJ tipes in die gehoor ongemaklik maak.Dalk moet ons meer duidelik maak dat die ‘pyltjies’ aan die bokant almal intervensies is, miskien met kleure wat anders as die ander kleure lyk.In een blokkie (regs) is engagement/commitment in een blokkie. Dalk moet ons dit split, want ons kan dalk die idee gee dat ons dink dis dieselfde ding.Is die ses blokkies in middel (links en regs) prosesse of uitkomste? Daar is bv. Leierskap, en aan regterkant is daar bv. Meer uitkomste, bv. Apathy? Dit is nie so duidelik in die model wat dit beteken nie.BeingDisconnectHow groups changeHow organisations changeThe way: How we changeWhy we changeEssence of ChangeWe change differentlyNew world of workNew SciencesConsciousnessOnDiversityMandalaConsulting™Nature of the world
8National Cultural Assumptions The About individual Me Assumptions Level of EngagementNational CulturalAssumptionsAboutMeTheindividualAssumptionsAboutWeLevel ofengagementTheTeamTheOrganisationAssumptionsAboutTheyand Society Context
9Level of engagement Benefit of Engagement – Viljoen (2008) Level ofengagementCorrelates directly to:Productivity AbseetismRetention TurnoverEmployee Satisfaction ApathyCreativity and Innovation Number of incidentsSafe Behaviour Number of AccidentsCustomer experience MistakesAbility to deal with change Apathye.
10Factors critical for engagement Within the context of the country:AssumptionsAboutMeSelf RegardResilience,EfficacyPersonal ResponsibilityCorporate CitizenshipTheindividualAssumptionsAboutWeSupport,Leadership,Work AttributesValuing Diversity,AccountabilityTheTeamAssumptionsAboutTheyTrust,Competitiveness,Adaptability to change,Inclusivity,EthicsTheOrganisation
11BeQ™ - Benchmark of Engagement Quotient The BeQ™-model reflects the interplay between assumptions and perceptions alive and well in organisations around constructs that contribute to the unleashing of individual voices, potential and gifts.As the organisational, the country climate and worldview also influence these perceptions, they are also explored.Specific focus on methodologyAlign Qualitative and Quantitative dataWorld CafeStory TellingAppreciative InquiryOD
12BeQ™ - Primary Objective Case StudyBeQ™ - Primary ObjectiveUnderstand the underlying mental models of the Case Organisation’s staff and those withing the departmentsExplore the relations between perceptions that influence organisational commitment and the unleashing of individual voicesUnderstand the underlying assumptions as they pertain to the individual, the various departments and contractor groups, the mine (organisation) and the greater organisationDetermine the level of engagement within the organisation, that will manifest in optimal productivity and safe behaviour.12
13BeQ™ - Conducting of Quantitative Research Case Study ResultsBeQ™ - Conducting of Quantitative Research13
14Supervisor Capability Production orientation BeQ™ ModelWithin the context of the culture/climate:Level ofVoiceWorld ViewAssumptionsAboutMeRespect,Regard,Resilience,ResponsibilityTheindividualTheTeamClimateAssumptionsAboutWeAlignment,Support,Supervisor CapabilityValuing Diversity,Accountabilitythat it is a scientific model that study dynamics conducive for production and safe behaviour on individual group and organisational level andthat you also decided what additional questions you want to be measured, e.g. translation of strategy.All factors measured were identified by academic and scientific research as pre-requisites for growth in organisations with regards to production and safe behaviour, thus optimising the human capital in a organisation.TheOrganisationCultureAssumptionsAboutTheySafety OrientationProduction orientationWellness capacityTrust,Inclusivity, EthicsBeQ™ Benchmark of Engagement Quotient14
17The story of Case organisation Sense of UrgencySupervisor ‘sMotivation andLeadershipHigh AlignmentFocus of BeQHigh Risk TakingLowBelongingSafety FocusLowAcknowledgementMpira mo hoParalyzedInconsistentPerf managementPrideLow ConfidenceDecreasedPerformanceCommitmentLanguageDiversityHave voiceUnwillingness toEngageLow WellbeingCapabilityFocus of BeQEvident Enablers Outcome Compromisers Manifested Dynamic17
18Predicting individual engagement at the case organisation I_ENGAGEMENT =.16*SUPERVISOR_CAPABILITY *TRUST EXPAT_LOCALIndividual engagement could be predicted from perceptions of supervisor capability, trust and expat-local relationships.The drivers of engagement were analysed for every department; they were different for each environment.1818
21Analysis, conclusions and reports Once research is complete our research consultants undertake full data verification and oversee collation and input.Data analysis follows, as well as cross-referencing, interpreting and presenting of the findings and conclusions into a full report, including recommendations for alterations and improvements for the future.Our consultants can also be called upon to undertake presentations to key audiences if required.Translation to all that have partaken in the study.Joint action planning to determine corrective actions.Organisational design report to improve climate is presented.
22Validation processWhat are the goals we have in mind with the measures?What is the broad research approach?What is the standard procedure we follow with data analysis?What are our preliminary results?What are the lessons we have learned?What are our next steps?
23Statistical goalsWe want to trust the meaning of our test scores (i.e., validity in all its forms)Reliable measurement (internal consistency of α = .80, Nunnally, 1978)Simple structure in terms of dimensionalityMeasure must predict important outcomesLong enough for above, but short enough to be comfortable for client respondent
24Broad research approach BEQ v1Internal properties?Core itemsBenchmarkingBEQ v2BEQ vBaseRelated to important outcomes?Model fit?BEQ language VersionsEquivalenceNorm databaseIn version 1: specified design requirements and assessed, revise content validity by calculating content validity ratio’s with independent reviewers, calculated reliability and factorial validity. Replicated in another major study, found stable replication. Analysed drivers of total scores. Benchmarked against UWES and ACS. Identified shortcomings in design and administration.In version 2: revised scale definitions, revised items, culled poor items, wrote new items, lenghtened scales. Pilot administration Netcare?BEQ Base: Scales with acceptable reliability and dimensionality. Establish concurrent validity with other Benchmark scales, but more nb. link with important work outcomes, i.e. behaviour, job performance, unit performance, CWB, OCB, safety, etc. Explore nomological network, e.g. commitment, etc.
36Next steps in development Analyse psychometric properties (v2) in pilot administrationAdminister v2 to client organisationLast refinements to produce Base versionWrite test manual and administration guideAssess relation of scores to outcome-measuresCross-validation of modelDevelop other language versionsAssess construct equivalenceDevelop norm-database
37Lessons we have learned Drivers of engagement are sample specific, but supervisor capability plays dominant roleMarry quantitative and qualitative approachesInstruments are stable in African contextAnalyse psychometric properties as evidence of your quality of measurement
38ReferencesAgarwala, T. 2003, ‘Innovative human resource practices and organisational commitment: An empirical investigation’, International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 14, no. 2, ppAllen, N.J. & Meyer, J.P. 1990, ‘The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organisation’, Journal of Occupational Psychology, vol. 63, ppAngle, H.L. & Perry, J.L. 1986, ‘Dual commitment and labour- management relationship climates‘, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 29, no. 1, ppAngle, H.L. & Perry, J.L. 1983, ‘Organisational commitment: Individual and organisational influences‘, Work and Occupations, vol. 10, no.2, ppBaruch, Y. & Winkelmann-Gleed, A. 2002, ‘Multiple commitments: A conceptual framework and empirical investigation on a Community Health Service Trust‘, British Journal of Management, vol. 13, ppBenson, J. 1998, ‘Dual commitment: Contract workers in Australian manufacturing enterprises’, Journal of Management Studies, vol. 35, no. 3, ppBishop, J.W. Dow Scott, K. & Burroughs, S.M. 2000, ‘Support, commitment, and employee outcomes in a team environment’, Journal of Management, vol. 26, no. 6, ppBlau, P.M. 1964, Exchange and Power in Social Life, Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, New York.3838
39ReferencesChang, K. & Chelladurai, P. 2003, ‘Comparison of Part-time workers and Full-time workers: Commitment and citizenship behaviours in Korean sport organisations’, Journal of Sport Management, vol. 17, ppCrabtree, S. 2005, ‘Engagement keeps the doctor away‘, Gallup Management Journal, January 13, pp. 1-4.Deery, S.J. & Iverson, R.D. 1998, ‘Antecedents and consequences of dual and unilateral commitment: A longitudinal study‘, The University of Melbourne, Department of Management working paper number 1, January 1998.Echols, M.E. 2005, ‘Engaging employees to impact performance‘ Chief Learning Officer, February, ppEisenberger, R. Fasolo, P & Davis-LaMastro, V. 1990, ‘Perceived organisational support and employee diligence, commitment and innovation‘, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 75, no. 1, ppEisenberger, R. Huntington. R. Hutchinson, S. & Sowa, D. 1986, ‘Perceived organisational support‘, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 71, no. 3, ppGouldner, A.W. 1960, ‘The norm of reciprocity. American Sociological Review, vol. 25, no. 2, ppGreenfield. W.M. 2004, ‘Decision making and employee engagement‘, Employee Relations Today‘, Summer, ppGubman, E. 2004, ‘From engagement to passion for work: The search for the missing person‘, Human Research Planning, pp3939
40ReferencesHarter, J.K. Schmidt, F.L. & Hayes, T.L. 2002, ‘Business- unit- level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta analysis‘, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 87, no. 2, ppKahn, W.A. 1990, ‘Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work‘, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 33, no. 4, ppLuthans, F. & Peterson, S.J. 2002, ‘Employee engagement and manager self-efficacy: Implications for managerial effectiveness and development‘, Journal of Management Development, vol. 21, 5, ppMay, D.R. Gilson, R.L. & Harter, L.M. 2004, ‘The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work’, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, vol. 77, PPMacey, W.H. & Schneider, B ‘The meaning of employee engagement’ , Industrial and Organisational Psychology, vol, 1, pp 3-30.McDade, S. & McKenzie, A. 2002, ‘Knowledge workers in the engagement equation’, Strategic HR Review, vol. 1, 4, ppMeyer, J.P. & Allen, N.J. 1991, ‘A three component conceptualisation of organisational commitment’, Human Resource Management Review, vol. 1, pp4040
41ReferencesMowday, R.T. Steers, R.M. & Porter, L.W. 1979, ‘The measurement of organizational commitment, Journal of Vocational Behaviour, vol. 14, ppMueller, C.W. Wallace, J.E. & Price, J.L. 1992, ‘Employee commitment: Resolving some issues‘, Work and Occupations, vol. 19, no. 3, ppPorter, L.W. Steers, R.M., Mowday, R.T. & Boulian, P.V. 1974, ‘Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians’, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 59, no. 5, ppPrice, J.L. & Mueller, C.W. 1986, Handbook of organizational measurement, Pitman Publishing, INC, Massachusetts.Price, J.L. & Mueller, C.W. 1981, ‘A causal model of turnover for nurses‘, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 24, no. 3, ppRobinson, D., Perryman, S. & Hayday, S. 2004, ‘The drivers of employee engagement‘, Institute of Employment Studies, Report 405.Viljoen, R.C. 2008, ‘Sustainable organisational transformation through inclusivity’, DBL dissertation. Available online www://etd.unisa.ac.za/ETD-db/theses/available/etd /unrestricted/00thesis.pdf4141