Behind employee engagement scores

The global employee engagement survey was just kicked off. The head of the organization in India asked his HRBP to call managers and encourage them and their employees to respond. However, while doing this, he also said, ‘’Look, ensure that the score is much better than the previous one.’’ The HRBP understood the underlying message. Obviously, the score was reasonably good, missing the actual pulses of the organisation.

Employee engagement is a critical factor in the success of any organization. It reflects the commitment, motivation, and satisfaction that employees feel towards their workplace. Many companies rely on employee engagement scores to assess these factors. However, these scores are not as straightforward as they seem. They are subjective, context-dependent, and can vary widely based on cultural and regional differences. That is why employee engagement scores should be interpreted with caution and why they may not always provide an accurate picture of the true level of engagement within an organization.

The Subjectivity of Employee Engagement Scores

Employee engagement surveys are often used to gauge how employees feel about their work environment, leadership, and overall job satisfaction. These surveys typically ask employees to rate various aspects of their work experience on a scale. While this approach can provide useful insights, it is important to recognize that the scores are inherently subjective.

Different employees may interpret the questions differently, and their responses can be influenced by a variety of factors, including their personal experiences, expectations, and cultural background.

For instance, two employees working in the same organization may have vastly different interpretations of what constitutes a "satisfactory" work environment. One employee may rate their engagement high because they have low expectations or are generally optimistic, while another may rate it lower because they have higher expectations or are more critical in their assessment. As a result, the scores may not accurately reflect the true level of engagement across the organization.

Cultural Influences on Engagement Scores

Cultural differences play a significant role in how employees rate their engagement. This can lead to variations in scores between different regions or countries, making it challenging to compare engagement levels across a global organization.

India: In India, employees tend to be more generous when rating their engagement. This could be due to cultural norms that emphasize positivity and respect for authority. Additionally, employees in India may be more likely to rate on certain aspect like health, safety, and environmental (HSE) scores highly because they compare workplace conditions to the broader environment outside the organization. In a country where external conditions may not always meet high standards, the relative safety and comfort of the workplace can lead to higher engagement scores. And there are few managers who may influence the score by some tactics. This can occur when employees fear that lower scores may lead to negative consequences for their department or their manager.

Japan: In contrast, Japanese employees are known for being more critical in their assessments. Cultural factors such as a high value placed on perfectionism and a strong sense of responsibility may lead employees to rate their engagement lower, even if their actual level of satisfaction is relatively high. This critical approach can skew engagement scores downward, making it appear as though employees are less engaged than they truly are.

United States: In the United States, employee engagement scores can vary widely depending on the industry and organizational culture. American employees generally value transparency, recognition, and opportunities for growth. If these elements are present, employees may rate their engagement high. However, there is also a growing trend of "engagement inflation," where employees feel pressured to rate their engagement positively, especially if managers subtly encourage them to do so. As a result, the scores might not fully reflect genuine engagement levels.

Europe: In the Europe, employee engagement is often influenced by the strong emphasis on work-life balance and job security. Employees in the Europe may rate their engagement lower if they perceive a lack of support for these aspects, even if other areas of their job are satisfactory. Additionally, employees tend to be reserved in their ratings, avoiding extreme scores and opting for more moderate responses. This cultural tendency can lead to engagement scores that are less polarized but may not capture the true depth of employee sentiment.

The Role of Managers in Shaping Scores

Managers play a crucial role in shaping employee engagement scores. In some cases, managers may encourage employees to rate their engagement positively, either directly or indirectly. This can happen when managers are concerned about how the scores will reflect on their leadership or when there are incentives tied to high engagement scores. While this approach may temporarily boost scores, it can ultimately undermine the validity of the data and mask underlying issues within the organization.

For example, a manager might emphasize the importance of positive engagement scores during team meetings or subtly suggest that high scores are linked to the department's success and more incentives. Employees, not wanting to disappoint their manager or fearing repercussions, may then provide inflated ratings. This practice can create a misleading picture of engagement levels and prevent the organization from identifying and addressing real concerns.?

The Challenge of Interpreting Engagement Scores

Given the subjectivity, cultural influences, and managerial pressures on employee engagement scores, it is clear that these scores should not be taken at face value. Organizations need to be cautious when interpreting the results of engagement surveys, especially when comparing scores across different regions or countries. A high score in one region may not necessarily indicate higher engagement than a lower score in another region; it may simply reflect cultural differences in how employees rate their experiences.

What should be done then?

To get a more accurate understanding of employee engagement, organizations should consider using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods. While surveys provide valuable data, they should be supplemented with other forms of feedback, such as one-on-one interviews, focus groups, and open-ended survey questions. This approach allows organizations to delve deeper into the reasons behind the scores and gain insights into the specific factors that influence employee engagement in different contexts.

Employee engagement scores are a useful tool for measuring how employees feel about their work environment, but they are not without their limitations. The subjectivity of the scores, coupled with cultural influences and the potential for managerial pressure, makes it difficult to get a true sense of employee engagement based solely on survey results. Organizations need to be aware of these challenges and adopt a more nuanced approach to interpreting engagement scores. By considering the broader context and combining different methods of assessment, companies can gain a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of employee engagement, leading to more effective strategies for improving workplace satisfaction and productivity.

(Views are personal)

Please read my blog >>

Please watch the podcast >>