Shailja_Pandey_09020441101_D_49_HR

2009-2011

Under the Guidance of

Brig. Rajiv Divekar (Retd) Director, SIMS

Submitted By

Shailja Pandey

HR CORE SECTION – D (49)

PNR No. 09020441101 SYMBIOSIS INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES

SIMS

DISSERTATION REPORT

“Employee Engagement: The Key to Realizing Competitive

Advantage”

Shailja Pandey (D – 49)

Table of Contents

Acknowledgement........................................................................................................3

Abstract ........................................................................................................................... 4

Introduction ................................................................................................................... 5

DDI Survey Report…………………………………………………………………………………9 MERCER Survey Report……………………………………………………………………..…16 Literature Review ...................................................................................................... 18

Research Methodology ............................................................................................. 23

Data Analysis and Interpretation ......................................................................... 26

Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 37

Findings and Recommendations ........................................................................... 42

Limitations…………………………………………………………………………………………..44 Reference & Bibliography : ..................................................................................... 45

Appendices (1) Questionnaire for Employees…………………………………………………………47 (2) Questionnaire for Executives……………………………………………………….…49


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Towards my efforts for this project, I required a direction to that place. This direction has been provided by many people, all of whom I’d like to thank. I wish to acknowledge my deep gratitude to Mr. Rajiv Divekar for his guidance and support & also for the initial planning of my project, and provided insights as to how I should approach this task. I wish to thank the Employees from different companies for their valuable inputs and for their support at every step of my project. Shailja Pandey HR – D Roll No. 49 Symbiosis Institute of Management Studies Pune


ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To prove that Employee engagement is one of the important key to indicate the competitive advantage of any organization. Overview: Employee Engagement has been defined differently by different authors. As per DDI (DEVELOPMENT DIMENSIONS INTERNATIONAL): “The extent to which people enjoy and believe in what they do and feel valued

for doing it.”

In general, Employee engagement is the level of commitment and involvement an employee has towards their organization and its values.

An engaged employee is aware of business context, and works with colleagues to improve performance within the job for the benefit of the organization.

It is a positive attitude held by the employees towards the organization and its values.

The project report focuses on how employee engagement is an antecedent of job involvement and what should company do to make the employees engaged so that they can have a competitive advantage.

On the surface, a workforce composed of employees who are satisfied with their jobs may seem like a desirable and even optimal state for an organization.

But in today’s global business environment, it is becoming clear that job satisfaction is not enough to help forge the link between employee performance and positive business results.

Over the last two decades, employers’ needs and interests have moved from creating conditions and programs that result in employees who are merely “satisfied” with pay, benefits and working conditions, to employees who are “committed” to the organization and not considering a move, to those who are genuinely “engaged” in the work and mission of the organization.

For employers, engagement has become the search for the “Holy Grail” of the 21st century.


INTRODUCTION

“Engagement is the state in which individuals are emotionally and intellectually committed to the organization as measured by three primary behaviors: Say, Stay and Strive.” If we look at it closely we will find three key words in every definition of Employee Engagement:

(a) Enjoyment:

People tend to receive more pleasure and satisfaction from what they do if they are in jobs or roles that match both their interests and their skills.

Look, for example, at the high failure rate of sales managers who were promoted because they were excellent salespeople. Some fail because they do not have the skills to manage, but we find a greater number stumbling because they discover that they derive more enjoyment from selling than they do from coaching others to sell.

And it’s not just the functional tasks that add to or detract from enjoyment. Some individuals thrive in a team environment versus one in which they work more independently.

Some people like jobs that require travel, while some prefer not to travel at all.

Others like a high-risk/high-reward bonus plan, where others prefer a more stable, predictable salary.

(b) Belief:

If people feel they are making meaningful contributions to their jobs, their organizations, and society as a whole, they tend to be more engaged.

The connection between, what people do every day and the goals and mission of the organization is crucial to engagement.

Walk into any children’s hospital, and you will find caregivers who passionately believe in their roles and the mission of the hospital.

You also will find high disdain for anything that gets in the way of providing quality care.


Likewise good trainers believe in what they do and like having opportunities to see others grow and develop.

A CFO might derive satisfaction from the organization’s financial integrity or by helping the organization grow by maximizing its investments.

(c) Value:

People want to be recognized and rewarded for their contributions. Rewards and recognition come in many forms, including competitive

compensation packages, a healthy work/life balance, and V.I.P. sales trips.

But perhaps more important is the heightened sense of worth employees feel when their leaders take just a few minutes to let them know that they are doing a great job and that their contributions are valued and appreciated.

Categories of Employee Engagement: According to the Gallup the Consulting organization there are there are different types of people:-

(1) Engaged -- "Engaged" employees are builders. They want to know the desired expectations for their role so they can meet and exceed them. They're naturally curious about their company and their place in it. They perform at consistently high levels. They want to use their talents and strengths at work every day. They work with passion and they drive innovation and move their organization forward.

(2) Not Engaged -- Not-engaged employees tend to concentrate on tasks rather than the goals and outcomes they are expected to accomplish. They want to be told what to do just so they can do it and say they have finished. They focus on accomplishing tasks vs. achieving an outcome. Employees who are not-engaged tend to feel their contributions are being overlooked and their potential is not being tapped. They often feel this way because they don't have productive relationships with their managers or with their coworkers.


(3) Actively Disengaged -- The "actively disengaged" employees are the "cave dwellers." They're "Consistently against Virtually Everything." They're not just unhappy at work; they're busy acting out their unhappiness. They sow seeds of negativity at every opportunity. Every day, actively disengaged workers undermine what their engaged coworkers accomplish. As workers increasingly rely on each other to generate products and services, the problems and tensions that are fostered by actively disengaged workers can cause great damage to an organization's functioning.

Importance of Engagement: An organization’s capacity to manage employee engagement is closely related to its ability to achieve high performance levels and superior business results. Some of the advantages of Engaged employees are:

Engaged employees will stay with the company, be an advocate of the company and its products and services, and contribute to bottom line business success.

They will normally perform better and are more motivated.

There is a significant link between employee engagement and profitability.

They form an emotional connection with the company. This impacts their attitude towards the company’s clients, and thereby improves customer satisfaction and service levels

It builds passion, commitment and alignment with the organization’s strategies and goals

Increases employees’ trust in the organization Creates a sense of loyalty in a competitive

environment Provides a high-energy working environment Boosts business growth Makes the employees effective brand ambassadors for the company

Engagement Value Proposition

ENGAGEMENT DRIVERS

> Right Employees in the Right Jobs > Exceptional Leadership > Organizational Systems and Strategies

WORK ENVIRONMENT > Aligned Effort and Strategy > Empowerment > Teamwork/Collaboration > Growth and Development > Support and Recognition

ENGAGED EMPLOYEES > Greater Loyalty > Enhanced Effort

ORGANIZATIONAL SUCCESS > Satisfied/Loyal Customers > Increased Retention > Higher Profits and Profitability > Revenue Growth


WHY ONE SHOULD CARE HR practitioners believe that the engagement challenge has a lot to do with how employee feels about the work experience and how he or she is treated in the organization. It has a lot to do with emotions which are fundamentally related to drive bottom line success in a company. There will always be people who never give their best efforts no matter how hard HR and line managers try to engage them. “But for the most part employees want to commit to companies because doing so satisfies a powerful and a basic need in connect with and contribute to something significant” Finally, when organizations have engaged employees, the long-term benefits appear in the bottom line. Organizations have more satisfied and loyal customers, increased profits, better-quality products or services, and greater growth potential.

The State of Workforce Engagement


As per DDI SURVEY:

ENGAGEMENT DRIVERS: Organizations drive engagement by proactively leveraging three sources of influence for change:

Employees Leaders Organizational systems and strategies

These three drivers work in concert to build an engaging work environment. Although engagement has multiple drivers, the ultimate ownership of engagement rests within the individual employee.

(1) EMPLOYEE: Organizations hoping to drive engagement must tap into employees’

passion, commitment, and identification with the organization. This is accomplished by having the right employees working in the right jobs, which is our first engagement driver.

When we say the “right “employees we mean that individuals have the skills to do the job (“can do”) and that their jobs tap into their personal motivators (“will do”).

Organizations can ensure high job fit by effectively deploying employees’ talents when making selection, placement, and promotion decisions.

Research has repeatedly shown that when job fit is high; an employee performs better and is more likely to stay with the organization.

In addition to having a motivational match, some employees are more likely than others to be inherently engaged in their work. This has implications for driving engagement levels because organizations can benefit from hiring employees with a greater tendency for engagement before they even begin to work.

DDI has been conducting groundbreaking research on what we call engagement propensity. We have found that some people have a set of personal characteristics—regardless of their jobs—that correlate with higher levels of engagement.

DDI conducted 10 studies across six client organizations and seven job families correlating a number of our proprietary test items with employee engagement survey scores.


We found that engagement was significantly correlated to these six factors:

Attachment to the job Agreeableness Emotional stability Openness to experience Achievement orientation Self-efficacy

These findings show that, in addition to assessing motivational job fit when hiring new employees, organizations can use cost-effective tests to identify employees who are more likely to be engaged on the job.

(2) EXCEPTIONAL LEADERSHIP:

The second engagement driver is exceptional leadership. Many of the work environment factors of our model are directly affected

by the quality of leadership. Leaders have the influence and power to serve as catalysts for higher

levels of engagement, not only in one or two areas, but in all aspects of leadership.

Even more compelling, our own assessment and testing research show that:

More engaged managers have more engaged direct reports. The direct reports of engaged managers are less likely to leave

the organization. Higher-performing managers have direct reports who are

more highly engaged.

Changes in leader behaviors can have a real impact on employee engagement. For example, a study of pre- and post training engagement scores showed that when leaders improved their skills through training, employees became more engaged in their work.

Engaging leaders understand that their role is not to take charge of all the decisions, but to be more like cheerleaders.

It’s about recognition for a job well done; it’s about giving people the room and encouragement to grow.


It’s also about being tough when necessary, holding people accountable for their performance.

(3) SYSTEMS AND STRATEGIES: Organizations need strong systems and strategies that support and

foster engagement. Examples of systems are hiring, promotion, performance management, recognition, compensation, training, and career development.

Together, these systems provide a firm foundation upon which to accelerate engagement. A shaky or incomplete foundation will make your efforts to build engagement more difficult, if not impossible.

AN ENGAGING WORK ENVIRONMENT The second component of our model, an engaging work environment, consists of five key elements:

1. Aligning effort with strategy—

Engagement begins with employees’ clear understanding of what they should be doing on the job.

Each employee needs a solid job description and a clear set of performance expectations.

Even more critical is their understanding that their individual goals are connected directly to the organization’s goals.

Unfortunately, less than half of employees (47 percent) are satisfied with their organization’s system for managing their performance.

Some organizations do an especially good job of creating alignment early in an employee’s tenure with the organization. For example, new team members at Toyota are given a thorough orientation that clearly defines how their roles and the decisions they make tie into Toyota’s overall approach and manufacturing philosophy.

To attain this alignment, leaders need to help all employees see the bigger picture and understand their roles relative to it.

They also need to show how an individual employee’s actions affect other departments and external customers.

Building a strong sense of alignment with strategy requires a good communication system and strong accountability.


Employees should be kept well informed about the changes that affect their work groups so that they aren’t confused or surprised when those changes are introduced.

Additionally, when organizations provide a clear sense of direction and keep employees well informed, employees are able to make the best use of their time, resources, and budgets, and, therefore, don’t get off track when setting priorities or “spin their wheels” when taking action.

Effective performance management is the backbone of employee engagement. It drives accountability, serves as the basis for individual development, and shows everyone that the organization has a clear focus and direction. It also enables leaders to pinpoint and address poor performance.

Few things are more frustrating to a high-performing team than a leader who refuses to handle the occasional member who is not measuring up. And many managers don’t have the confidence to address poor performance.

2. Empowerment—

Empowerment is a feeling of job ownership and commitment brought about through the ability to make decisions, be responsible, be measured by results, and be recognized as a thoughtful, contributing human being rather than a pair of hands doing what others say.

It implies having the authority to make decisions, follow through, and get things done. Organizations build empowerment by choosing employees who take personal pleasure in the work they do and by giving employees the ability to make important decisions about their work.

Employees feel empowered when a task appears to have a specific goal or purpose that is of value to the individual.

Employees working in health care and nonprofit organizations often point to the rewarding qualities of their work and the alignment between their personal beliefs and the goals of the organization in spite of lower pay or stressful work tasks.

In other industries, the value of employees’ work may be less apparent, and it is more difficult to develop a sense of purpose or see the impact of one’s efforts.


Using good measures of motivational fit and job fit during the employee hiring process can ensure that organizations are selecting the kind of people who find meaning in their work.

Organizations also foster empowerment when employees have the perception that their actions are self-determined rather than directed by others.

Leaders play a key role in developing a sense of empowerment in their direct reports.

Empowering leaders trust their employees and give them the opportunity to make decisions without micromanaging or taking over tasks when the going gets tough.

3. Teamwork/Collaboration—

“Even the Lone Ranger had a partner,” is a truism in today’s business environment.

Few employees can do their work without the support and input of others.

When employees have the support and cooperation of their coworkers, they are able to accomplish more and share ideas to come up with creative solutions. In the context of engagement, teamwork and collaboration require good relationships both within the work group and across work groups.

Many organizations have strong teams with members who work well with each other.

However, these teams or work groups must also work effectively with other teams or work groups in the organization.

Many organizations have “silos” or competing work groups that fail to recognize the need to unite their efforts toward a common goal.

When work groups become insulated from other groups, they can develop an “us vs. them” mentality that ends up hurting the organization in small ways each and every day, and in big ways in the long run.

Studies have shown that teamwork and collaboration within and between groups can predict an organization’s shareholder value and long-term team productivity and effectiveness.

Additionally, the level of support and teamwork plays an important role in determining whether employees choose to leave or stay with an organization in the long term.


In spite of the importance of teamwork, DDI’s 2003–2004 Leadership Forecast showed that, according to employees, only 41 percent of leaders have strong teambuilding skills A key ingredient in developing and maintaining high levels of cooperation and teamwork is a work environment built on trust.

Trust means employees have confidence that others’ actions are consistent with their words, that leadership is concerned about their welfare and interests apart from what they can do for the organization, that the skills they have developed are respected and valued, and that each employee uniquely matters in the workplace.

Many studies have indicated that trust is a critical success factor in organizations and plays a key role in fostering high levels of teamwork and collaboration.

4. Growth and development—

DDI’s 2004 Selection Forecast study found that many employees leave their jobs for better growth and development opportunities, often offered by other organizations.

Most employees want to keep their jobs fresh and interesting by learning new approaches and building new skills.

Organizations can create engagement in their workforce by building a learning culture and creating individual development plans for every employee.

Promoting employee growth and development requires focused attention in several areas of the organization.

First, organizations need to select employees who have a willingness to learn and can adapt their behaviors to a changing work environment.

This willingness to grow and learn promotes innovation and creativity in the workforce.

Second, leaders need to work with employees to understand strengths and development needs, and provide opportunities to leverage or build skills and knowledge.

Most employees want to use their best skills and will feel engaged when organizations recognize and capitalize on their unique strengths, rather than placing emphasis on fixing weaknesses.

Third, organizations also need to provide meaningful development plans and opportunities that include programs such as training, succession management, special projects and assignments, and mentoring.


The key to a successful development program is to ensure that all employees have a plan for development and clear accountabilities for making progress on their plans.

The value of investing in a strong and diverse development program is clear. For example, studies have found that investments in development programs are significantly related to financial success in the organization.

5. Support and recognition—

Employees who feel they are listened to, supported, and recognized for their contributions are likely to be more engaged.

People like to be recognized for their unique contributions. In the Walker Information study Halfway out the Door, care and concern

for employees emerged as one of the most important factors influencing employee commitment to their employers.

The U.S. Department of Labor confirms that lack of employee appreciation plays a critical role in employees’ decisions to leave their organizations.

Support and recognition can mean several things in the context of creating an engaging work environment.

In one sense, support means that employees are appreciated for their ideas and efforts. Instead of treating employees as pawns, engaging organizations support contributions from employees by listening to them and responding to their ideas and concerns.

Although many organizations provide formal rewards and recognition programs for employee ideas and contributions, many employees are hungry for more day-to-day informal recognition.

Employees who are unaccustomed to recognition for their work often remember a single pat on the back from a coworker or boss for weeks or even months.

Support and recognition in an engaging environment is a daily occurrence that builds employee self-esteem and creates strong partnerships.

Each employee has unique skills and perspectives that add to the organization’s ability to generate and analyze ideas. These ideas, in turn, yield a positive benefit for the organization’s bottom line.


For example, Watson Wyatt found that when employees have input into how work gets done and can share ideas with senior leaders, there is a corresponding increase in a company’s market value.

Support and recognition also mean that employees receive regular feedback about how well they are doing.

DDI’s Selection Forecast study found that only a little more than half (58 percent) of employees feel that they get enough feedback about how well they are doing.

Employees need and expect feedback as a way of supporting their work and recognizing their progress. Ongoing feedback serves as a motivator for action by creating focus and shaping action.

Unfortunately, some leaders and employees see the opportunity to provide feedback as an open invitation for criticism, often delivered after the work is done.

They have a hard time providing feedback that is specific, timely, and balanced.

While leaders should work to address problems, they often forget that employees need encouragement and reinforcement for a job well done.

Still, many leaders continue to struggle with providing honest and open feedback on performance.

Engagement requires good feedback skills among employees and between employees and leaders.

This open flow of information ensures that employee behaviors stay focused on the right priorities.

As per MERCER Survey Report

Drivers of employee engagement vary widely: In US: 1. Confident can achieve career objectives 2. Sense of personal accomplishment 3. Confident organization will be successful 4. Quality is a high priority 5. Opportunity for growth/development 6. Information/assistance to manage career


7. Flexibility to provide good customer service In UK: 1. Sense of personal accomplishment 2. Confidence in senior management 3. Opportunities for training 4. Paid fairly, given performance 5. Good reputation for customer service 6. Regular feedback on performance 7. Comparable benefits to industry 8. Cooperation between groups In China: 1. Sense of personal accomplishment 2. Paid fairly, given performance 3. Comparable benefits to industry 4. Confidence in senior management 5. IT systems support business needs 6. Opportunities for training 7. Regular feedback on performance In Brazil: 1. Sense of personal accomplishment 2. Confidence in senior management 3. Opportunities for training 4. Paid fairly, given performance 5. Good reputation for customer service 6. Comparable benefits to industry Going through all the surveys and data I come to one conclusion about the drivers of employee engagement:

1. Rewards & Recognition 2. Challenging Job 3. Opportunities to learn and grow 4. Team Leader’s Cooperativeness & Continuous Work related feedback 5. Communication System


LITERATURE REVIEW

Employee Retention in the New Millennium:

Today's labor force is different. Supervisors must take responsibility for their own employee retention. If they don't, they could be left without enough good employees. A wise employer will learn how to attract and keep good employees, because in the long run, this workforce will make or break a company's reputation.

New supervisors must be prepared to be collaborative, supportive, and nurturing of their people. The old style of "my-way-or-the-highway" style of management is a thing of the past. Most new supervisors need training to understand what it really takes to retain employees.

Employee retention involves being sensitive to people's needs and demonstrating the various strategies in the five families detailed in Roger Herman's classic book on employee retention, Keeping Good People.

1. Environmental 2. Relationship 3. Support 4. Growth 5. Compensation

What Drives Employee Engagement In India?

Mercer Human Resource Consulting did “What’s Working” studies which provide insight into workers’ attitudes and the factors that drive their engagement. The results are based on data collected from a statistically valid sample from a broad cross section of industries, weighted to represent the Indian workforce.


Survey category scores for India ranked by favorability: (1) Quality & customer focus ............. = 85 % (2) Work processes ........................... = 85 % (3) Ethics & Integrity......................... = 84 % (4) Satisfaction................................. = 83 % (5) Work life balance……………………………. = 83 % (6) Communication............................ = 82 % (7) Immediate Manager...................... = 81 % (8) Leadership & direction................... = 81 % (9) Job security & career growth.......... = 81 % (10) Employee Engagement................ = 81 % (11) Teamwork & Cooperation............. = 80 % (12) Training & Development............... = 80 % (13) Benefits..................................... = 79 % (14) Compensation............................ = 79 % A Closer Look: Drivers of Engagement Above Average Rating

(% Favorable) Below Average Rating

(% Favorable)

Top Half Positions ■ Senior Leadership ■ Quality and Customer Focus ■ Work/Life Balance ■ Work Processes

■ Compensation ■ Talent Management or People Development ■ Performance Management ■ Benefits

Bottom Half Positions ■ Fairness & Integrity ■ Involvement ■ Company Image and Direction ■ Teamwork & Cooperation ■ Information Technology ■ Job Fulfillment

■ Communication

So, as per the survey the top 7 factors which ensures employee engagement & commitment to the organization are as follows:


TOP FIVE DRIVERS IN INDIA

TOP ATTRACTION DRIVERS

TOP RETENTION DRIVERS

TOP ENGAGEMENT DRIVERS

Career advancement opportunities

Manager inspires enthusiasm for work

Input into decision making in

my department

Challenging work Satisfaction with the

organization’s business decisions

Senior management’s actions consistent

with our values Learning and development opportunities

Positive impact of technology on

work/life balance

Organization’s reputation for social

Responsibility

Competitive base pay Competitive performance management

Seek opportunities to develop new

knowledge/skills Reputation of the organization as a good employer

Can impact quality of work/product/service

Have excellent career advancement opportunities

Confidence n senior

management

Paid fairly, given Performance

Organizational reputation for customer service

Sense of personal accomplishment

Comparable benefits to industry

Regular performance feedback

Reasonable Workload

Employee

Engagement

INDIA

36%

46%

15% 3%

Engaged

Enrolled

Disenchanted

Disengaged


MODELS REFFERED

(1) Mercer’s Employee Engagement Model:

SATISFIED MOTIVATED

■ Enjoys job ■ Is not dissatisfied with terms and conditions ■ Content to work alone ■ Does not go “above and beyond” ■ Not necessarily a team player ■ Often externally focused

■ Contributes energetically ■ Strives to achieve personal goals ■ Values achieving personal goals more than team/organizational goals ■ Focused individual contributor ■ More loyal to personal professional goals than to the organization

COMMITTED ADVOCATE ■ Loyal to organization, optimistic for the future ■ Sees the bigger picture, with a sense of how job fits in ■ Collaborates to achieve team goals ■ Openly ambitious for self, team and company ■ Believes the organization will enable his/her good performance ■ Has a sense of belonging to organization;

■ Contributes discretionary effort ■ Proactively seeks opportunities to serve the mission of the organization ■ Speaks positively about the organization’s products and services ■ Recommends organization as an employer ■ Is willing to withhold criticism and/or be constructively critical for the good of the organization


(2) Hewitt Employee Engagement Model:

According to this model - What is an Engaged Employee? An engaged employee is one who willingly self-describes him/herself as

exhibiting three key sets of behaviors. Best Employers—those with highly engaged employees—have people

on board who, according to measurements taken: Speak positively about the organization to co-workers,

potential employees, and customers (We call this the Say element)

Have an intense desire to be part of the organization (We call this the Stay element)

Exert extra effort and are dedicated to doing the very best job possible to contribute to the organization’s business success (We call this the Strive element)

The Engagement Model:

Showing the 18 Engagement Driver areas and 6 work environment

categories identified as having the highest impact on engagement

feels valued and involved at work and expresses views freely

■ Resilient to short-term dissatisfies.


Methodology – including approaches attempted and discarded, problems experienced.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

SCOPE OF THE STUDY: There are many sources of competitive advantage to companies and industries. Every Company is having different departments and every department is working towards the growth of company and hence giving it an extra edge over others i.e. Competitive Advantage. Here I tried to highlight the role of HR practices in providing Competitive Advantage to companies and one of those practices which I’ve focused specifically is “Employee Engagement”.

# People

- Senior Leadership

- Manager - Coworkers

# Work/Motivation

- Intrinsic Motivation

- Resources

- Wok tasks

# Total Rewards

- Pay - Benefits/

retirement Savings

- Recognition

Engagemen

t

# Opportunities

- Career Opportunit

ies - Learning

& Developm

ent

# Procedures

- People/ HR Practices

- Managing Performance

- Work Processes

# Quality of life/

Values - Work/ Life Balance

- Physical Work Environment

- Organizational reputation

- Employee Well-being & Health


SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY: There is a lot of variation in terms of factors providing competitive advantage to an organization. While doing the study I realized the same and found out various parameters that can decide the competitive edge of an organization. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: The objective of the study is to analyze the effect of HR practices, employee engagement to be precise; on competitive edge of an organization. And also how Employee Engagement is the key to Competitive Advantage? METHODOLOGY: The study is carried on in a proper planned and systematic manner. This methodology includes

Identifying the industry for study.

Observation and collection of data.

Analysis of data.

Conclusion based on analysis.

HYPOTHESIS: Employee Engagement: The Key to Realizing Competitive Advantage” SAMPLING: Industry:

(1) Manufacturing (2) Alcohol & Beverage Industry

Company:

(1) Manufacturing: Atlas Copco Pvt. Ltd. Cummins India Ltd.


(2) Alcohol & Beverage Industry: Allied Blenders & Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Bacardi

Sample Size: Managerial Level: I’ve taken 10 Employees per Company, hence 20 employees per Industry and 40 Employees in all as respondents. Executive level: I’ve taken 5 executives per company, hence 10 executives per industry, and so 20 executives in all as respondents Techniques: 1. Questionnaire- There are two questionnaires designed both for employees and executives to study in detail about what they feel regarding the process and how effective it is. 2. Interviews-

Interviews were taken from few executives to get some confidential data and were unbiased.

3. Observations-

Observing Industry trends through scholarly articles and

DATA COLLECTION METHODOLOGY

The primary as well as the secondary sources was used for collection of data. In primary source of data collection the Unstructured interviews and Benchmarking study was used and in secondary source of data collection relevant records, books, Scholarly Articles, Blogs, Journals and magazines were used. Thus the sources of data collection were as follows:


(1) Secondary Data:

Scholarly Articles. Blogs. Journals. Surveys done earlier

(2) Primary Data:

Direct unstructured interview with different sector employees

and executive of those companies.

Benchmarking Employee engagement processes with different

organizations.

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

As per our hypothesis i.e. “Employee Engagement: The Key to Realizing

Competitive Advantage” we have two variables:

(1) Employee Engagement (2) Competitive Advantage

Further Division:

(1) Employee Engagement is further divided into: (a) Rewards & Recognition (R & R) (b) Communication System (c) Challenging Work (d) Opportunities to learn and grow (e) Team Leader's Cooperativeness & regular Feedback

(2) Competitive Advantage: (a) Productivity (b) Lowering of Operational Expenses (c) Low Attrition Rate (d) Low Absenteeism


CHOICE OF ANALYTICAL TOOLS: Since our data is non parametric (not normal), so we can’t use ANOVA.

DATA TEST INPUT REQUIRED

OUTPUT REQUIRED

Parametric Correlation Regression

Continuous Any

Parametric ANOVA Any Continuous

Non Parametric Kruskal Wallis Discontinuous Discontinuous

Non Parametric Mood’s Median Discontinuous Discontinuous

Non Parametric Mann Whitney Discontinuous Discontinuous

Hence, we chose to use:

(a) Kruskal Wallis Test: This test lets us know that if there is a difference in result, but it does not tell us about the nature of difference

(b) Mood’s Median Test: This test lets us know about the nature of difference i.e. whether it is more or less.

ANALYSIS OF PARAMETERS FOR EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT

REWARDS & RECOGNITION

Null Hypothesis – “There is no difference in the satisfaction level for Rewards & Recognition in two industries” (1.1) Kruskal-Wallis Test: R & R versus INDUSTRY

INDUSTRY N Median Ave Rank Z

1 20 3.000 14.4 -3.30

2 20 4.000 26.6 3.30

Overall 40 20.5

H = 10.89 DF = 1 P = 0.001


H = 11.64 DF = 1 P = 0.001 (adjusted for ties)

By looking at the results we can say with 99.999 % (p value = 0.001) confidence level that the Null Hypothesis is wrong and hence, There is a considerate amount of difference in satisfaction level of employees for Rewards & Recognition in two industries

People are happier in Alcohol Beverage Industry (i.e. 2) with Median 4

than in Manufacturing Industry (i.e. 1) with Median 3 (1.2) Mood Median Test: R & R versus INDUSTRY Mood median test for R & R

Chi-Square = 10.10 DF = 1 P = 0.001

Individual 95.0% CIs

INDUSTRY N<= N> Median Q3-Q1 +---------+---------+---------+------

1 16 4 3.00 1.00 (---------*

2 6 14 4.00 2.00 (-------*---------)

+---------+---------+---------+------

2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0

Overall median = 3.00

A 95.0% CI for median (1) – median (2): (-3.00,-1.00)

By looking at the results we can say with 99.999 % (p value = 0.001) confidence level that the Null Hypothesis is wrong and hence, There is a considerate amount of difference in satisfaction level of employees for Rewards & Recognition in two industries

People are happier in Alcohol Beverage Industry (i.e. 2) with 14 people

out of 20 choosing 4 than in Manufacturing Industry (i.e. 1) with 16 people choosing 3.

“In Alcohol & Beverage Industry Employees are more satisfied with Rewards & Recognition given over there, Hence Alcohol & Beverage Industry is Better than Manufacturing Industry”

CHALLENGING JOB

Null Hypothesis – “There is no difference in the satisfaction level for Challenging work in two industries”


(2.1) Kruskal-Wallis Test: Challenging Job versus INDUSTRY Kruskal-Wallis Test on Challenging Job


1 20 3.000 15.8 -2.53

2 20 4.000 25.2 2.53

Overall 40 20.5

H = 6.40 DF = 1 P = 0.011


By looking at the results we can say with 99.989 % (p value 0.011) confidence level that the Null Hypothesis is wrong and hence, there is a considerate amount of difference in satisfaction level of employees for Challenging Work in two industries.


than in Manufacturing Industry (i.e. 1) with Median 3. (2.2) Mood Median Test: Challenging Job versus INDUSTRY Mood median test for Challenging Job

Chi-Square = 5.01 DF = 1 P = 0.025


INDUSTRY N< N>= Median Q3-Q1 -----+---------+---------+---------+-

1 12 8 3.00 2.00 (--------------*-------------------)

2 5 15 4.00 0.75 *

-----+---------+---------+---------+-

2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00


A 95.0% CI for median(1) - median(2): (-1.00,0.00)

By looking at the results we can say with 99.975 % (p value = 0.025) confidence level that the Null Hypothesis is wrong and hence, There is a considerate amount of difference in satisfaction level of employees for Challenging Job in two industries

People are happier in Alcohol Beverage Industry (i.e. 2) with 15 people out of 20 choosing 4 than in Manufacturing Industry (i.e. 1) with 12 people choosing 3


“In Alcohol & Beverage Industry Employees have more Challenging Work than in Manufacturing Industry. Hence Alcohol & Beverage Industry is Better than Manufacturing Industry”

OPPORTUNITIES TO LEARN AND GROW

Null Hypothesis – “There is no difference in the satisfaction level for Opportunities to learn & grow in two industries”

(3.1) Kruskal-Wallis Test: Opportunities to Learn and Grow versus INDUSTRY Kruskal-Wallis Test on opportunities to learn and Grow


1 20 3.000 15.1 -2.91

2 20 4.000 25.9 2.91

Overall 40 20.5

H = 8.46 DF = 1 P = 0.004


By looking at the results we can say with 99.996 % (p value 0.004) confidence level that the Null Hypothesis is wrong and hence, there is a considerate amount of difference in satisfaction level of employees for Opportunities to Learn & Grow in two industries.


than in Manufacturing Industry (i.e. 1) with Median 3. (3.2) Mood Median Test: opportunities to learn and Grow versus INDUSTRY Mood median test for opportunities to learn and Grow

Chi-Square = 4.91 DF = 1 P = 0.027


INDUSTRY N< N>= Median Q3-Q1 -----+---------+---------+---------+-

1 13 7 3.00 3.00 (---------------------*------------)

2 6 14 4.00 1.75 (---------*

-----+---------+---------+---------+-

1.60 2.40 3.20 4.00




By looking at the results we can say with 99.973 % (p value = 0.027) confidence level that the Null Hypothesis is wrong and hence, There is a considerate amount of difference in satisfaction level of employees for Opportunities to Learn & Grow in two industries


“In Alcohol & Beverage Industry Employees have more Opportunities to Learn & Grow than in Manufacturing Industry, Hence Alcohol & Beverage Industry is Better than Manufacturing Industry”

TEAM LEADER’S COOPERATIVENESS

Null Hypothesis – “There is no difference in the satisfaction level for Team Leader’s Cooperativeness & Regular work related Feedback in two industries”

(4.1) Kruskal-Wallis Test: Team Leaders Cooperativeness & versus INDUSTRY Kruskal-Wallis Test on Team Leaders Cooperativeness &


1 20 3.000 16.2 -2.35

2 20 4.000 24.9 2.35

Overall 40 20.5

H = 5.54 DF = 1 P = 0.019


By looking at the results we can say with 99.981 % (p value 0.019) confidence level that the Null Hypothesis is wrong and hence, there is a considerate amount of difference in satisfaction level of employees for their Team Leader’s Cooperativeness in two industries.


People are happier in Alcohol Beverage Industry (i.e. 2) with Median 4 than in Manufacturing Industry (i.e. 1) with Median 3.

(4.2) Mood Median Test: Team Leaders Cooperativeness versus INDUSTRY Mood median test for Team Leaders Cooperativeness

Chi-Square = 8.29 DF = 1 P = 0.004


INDUSTRY N< N>= Median Q3-Q1 +---------+---------+---------+------

1 13 7 3.00 1.00 *-------------------)

2 4 16 4.00 1.00 *--------------)

+---------+---------+---------+------

3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50



By looking at the results we can say with 99.996 % (p value = 0.004) confidence level that the Null Hypothesis is wrong and hence, There is a considerate amount of difference in satisfaction level of employees for their Team Leader’s Cooperativeness in two industries


“In Alcohol & Beverage Industry Employees are more happy with their Team Leaders than in Manufacturing Industry, Hence Alcohol & Beverage Industry is better than Manufacturing Industry”

COMMUNICATION SYSTEM

Null Hypothesis – “There is no difference in the satisfaction level for Communication System in two industries”

(5.1) Kruskal-Wallis Test: communication system versus INDUSTRY Kruskal-Wallis Test on communication system



1 20 3.000 12.4 -4.41

2 20 4.000 28.7 4.41

Overall 40 20.5

H = 19.44 DF = 1 P = 0.000


By looking at the results we can say with 100 % (p value 0.000) confidence level that the Null Hypothesis is wrong and hence, there is a considerate amount of difference in satisfaction level of employees Communication System in two industries.


than in Manufacturing Industry (i.e. 1) with Median 3. (5.2) Mood Median Test: communication system versus INDUSTRY Mood median test for communication system

Chi-Square = 25.60 DF = 1 P = 0.000


INDUSTRY N<= N> Median Q3-Q1 --------+---------+---------+--------

1 18 2 3.00 1.00 (----------*

2 2 18 4.00 1.00 *----------)

--------+---------+---------+--------

2.80 3.50 4.20


A 95.0% CI for median(1) - median(2): (-1.00,-1.00)

By looking at the results we can say with 100 % (p value = 0.000) confidence level that the Null Hypothesis is wrong and hence, There is a considerate amount of difference in satisfaction level of employees with their Communication System in two industries


“In Alcohol & Beverage Industry Employees are more happy with their Communication System than in Manufacturing Industry, Hence Alcohol & Beverage Industry is better than Manufacturing Industry”


ANALYSIS OF PARAMETERS FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE

OPERATIONAL EXPENSE

Null Hypothesis – “There is no difference in the Operational Expense reduction with employee engagement in two industries” (1.1) Kruskal-Wallis Test: Operational Expense versus Industry Kruskal-Wallis Test on Operational Expense

Industry N Median Ave Rank Z

1 10 3.500 8.6 -1.44

2 10 4.000 12.4 1.44

Overall 20 10.5

H = 2.06 DF = 1 P = 0.151


By looking at the results we can say with 99.849 % (p value 0.151) confidence level that the Null Hypothesis is wrong and hence, there is a considerate amount of difference in Operational Expense reduction with employee engagement in two industries.

People have more Operational Expense reduction with employee

engagement in Alcohol Beverage Industry (i.e. 2) with Median 4 than in Manufacturing Industry (i.e. 1) with Median 3.

(1.2) Mood Median Test: Operational Expense versus Industry Mood median test for Operational Expense

Chi-Square = 3.81 DF = 1 P = 0.051


Industry N< N>= Median Q3-Q1 +---------+---------+---------+------

1 5 5 3.50 1.25 (-------*-------------)

2 1 9 4.00 1.00 *---------------)

+---------+---------+---------+------

3.00 3.60 4.20 4.80


A 95.0% CI for median (1) – median (2): (-2.00,0.00)

By looking at the results we can say with 99.949 % (p value = 0.051) confidence level that the Null Hypothesis is wrong and hence, There is a considerate amount of difference in Operational Expense reduction with employee engagement in two industries


People have more Operational Expense reduction with employee engagement in Alcohol Beverage Industry (i.e. 2) with 9 people out of 10 choosing 4 than in Manufacturing Industry (i.e. 1) with 5 people choosing 3

“In Alcohol & Beverage Industry there is more reduction of Operational Expense with employee engagement than in Manufacturing Industry, Hence Alcohol & Beverage Industry is better than Manufacturing Industry”

ATTRITION RATE

Null Hypothesis – “There is no difference in the Operational Expense reduction with employee engagement in two industries”

(2.1) Kruskal-Wallis Test: Attrition Rate versus Industry Kruskal-Wallis Test on Attrition Rate


1 10 3.000 9.0 -1.13

2 10 4.000 12.0 1.13

Overall 20 10.5

H = 1.29 DF = 1 P = 0.257


By looking at the results we can say with 99.743 % (p value 0.257) confidence level that the Null Hypothesis is wrong and hence, there is a considerate amount of difference in Attrition Rate reduction with employee engagement in two industries.

People have more Attrition Rate reduction with employee engagement

in Alcohol Beverage Industry (i.e. 2) with Median 4 than in Manufacturing Industry (i.e. 1) with Median 3.

(2.2) Mood Median Test: Attrition Rate versus Industry Mood median test for Attrition Rate

Chi-Square = 1.82 DF = 1 P = 0.178


Industry N<= N> Median Q3-Q1 +---------+---------+---------+------

1 7 3 3.00 1.00 *--------------------------------)

2 4 6 4.00 1.00 (--------------------------------*

+---------+---------+---------+------


3.00 3.30 3.60 3.90



By looking at the results we can say with 99.822 % (p value = 0.178) confidence level that the Null Hypothesis is wrong and hence, There is a considerate amount of difference in Attrition Rate reduction with employee engagement in two industries

People have more Attrition Rate reduction with employee engagement

in Alcohol Beverage Industry (i.e. 2) with 6 people out of 10 choosing 4 than in Manufacturing Industry (i.e. 1) with 7 people choosing 3

“In Alcohol & Beverage Industry there is more reduction of Attrition Rate with employee engagement than in Manufacturing Industry, Hence Alcohol & Beverage Industry is better than Manufacturing Industry”

ABSENTEEISM

Null Hypothesis – “There is no difference in the Absenteeism reduction with employee engagement in two industries”

(3.1) Kruskal-Wallis Test: Absenteeism versus Industry Kruskal-Wallis Test on Absenteeism


1 10 3.000 8.2 -1.78

2 10 4.000 12.9 1.78

Overall 20 10.5

H = 3.16 DF = 1 P = 0.076


By looking at the results we can say with 99.743 % (p value 0.257) confidence level that the Null Hypothesis is wrong and hence, there is a considerate amount of difference in Absenteeism rate reduction with employee engagement in two industries.

People have more Absenteeism rate reduction with employee

engagement in Alcohol Beverage Industry (i.e. 2) with Median 4 than in Manufacturing Industry (i.e. 1) with Median 3.


(3.2) Mood Median Test: Absenteeism versus Industry Mood median test for Absenteeism

Chi-Square = 5.05 DF = 1 P = 0.025


Industry N< N>= Median Q3-Q1 +---------+---------+---------+------

1 7 3 3.00 1.00 *--------------------------------)

2 2 8 4.00 0.25 (----------*

+---------+---------+---------+------

3.00 3.30 3.60 3.90



By looking at the results we can say with 99.822 % (p value = 0.178) confidence level that the Null Hypothesis is wrong and hence, There is a considerate amount of difference in Absenteeism rate reduction with employee engagement in two industries

People have more Absenteeism rate reduction with employee engagement in Alcohol Beverage Industry (i.e. 2) with 8 people out of 10 choosing 4 than in Manufacturing Industry (i.e. 1) with 7 people choosing 3

“In Alcohol & Beverage Industry there is more reduction of Absenteeism rate with employee engagement than in Manufacturing Industry, Hence Alcohol & Beverage Industry is better than Manufacturing Industry” “Hence, we can say with reference to the above analysis that Alcohol & Beverage Industry is Better than Manufacturing Industry and hence has Competitive advantage over Manufacturing Industry.”

CONCLUSION

Employee Engagement is the buzz word term for employee communication. It is a positive attitude held by the employees towards the organization and its values. It is rapidly gaining popularity, use and importance in the workplace and impacts organizations in many ways. Employee engagement emphasizes the importance of employee communication on the success of a business. An organization should thus recognize employees, more than any other variable, as powerful contributors to a company's competitive position.


Therefore employee engagement should be a continuous process of:

(b) Learning (c) Improvement (d) Measurement (e) Action

We would hence conclude that raising and maintaining employee engagement lies in the hands of an organization and requires a perfect blend of time, effort, commitment and investment to craft a successful endeavor. Some of the parameters that ensure employee engagement:

(1) Strong Leadership:

Engagement has to be a leadership-driven initiative from the most senior level all the way to the front line.

No one affects an employee’s engagement as much as his or her immediate leader.

Engaged leaders coach proactively for success, inspire loyalty and trust, and build an environment in which employees are motivated and engaged.

(2) Strong Systems & Strategies:

To foster an environment of engagement, organizations need

strong systems and strategies that promote and support engagement.

Hiring and selection systems that measure motivation and the propensity for engagement, leadership training in certain skills (coaching, influencing others, managing change), performance management and accountability systems that provide direction, support, and objective assessments—all work together to provide a foundation and environment in which engagement can flourish.

(3) Creating Job Fit:

Ultimately, engagement lies in the heart of the employee.

Measuring motivational and job fit during the hiring process ensures that you select people who can and want to find meaning in their work.


Some people have personal characteristics that correlate with higher levels of engagement, and those characteristics can be screened for during the hiring process.

Once you’ve hired the right people, engagement can be either fueled or hampered by the work environment and quality of leadership.

Finally, when organizations have engaged employees, the long-term

benefits appear in the bottom line. Organizations have more satisfied and loyal customers, increased profits, better-quality products or services, and greater growth potential.

In the end, the rewards are many. A fully engaged workforce is a loyal

workforce—expect turnover to drop. In addition, an engaged workforce will give the extra effort your organization needs to remain competitive.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL SUCCESS

ENGAGED EMPLOYEES:

The right work environment should, of course, lead to a heightened sense of employee motivation, which, in turn, leads to enhanced or discretionary effort.

Enhanced effort is not just putting in the extra time; it’s also getting things right the first time and going out of one’s way for the customer.

The factors determining satisfaction in Herzberg’s work are surprisingly similar to the elements of employee engagement.

According to Herzberg, the true motivators at work include achievement, recognition, work itself, responsibility, advancement, and personal growth.

The same things that drive motivation and enhanced effort also increase employee loyalty to the organization.

Many studies have shown that employees base their decisions to stay or leave on factors related to employee engagement.

It is not uncommon for employees to leave high-paying or high-status jobs because they don’t feel fulfilled. D

DI’s Leadership Forecast study found that about one-quarter of leaders have considered dropping out of their leadership positions, largely because they want to pursue other personal or career goals.


Building an engaging work environment is key to making sure that employees find fulfillment in their current jobs.

Organizations that lose employees by failing to create engagement will pay the price.

Past studies have shown that in an organization of 10,000 employees, the cost of a single percentage point of turnover can exceed $366,000

ORGANIZATIONAL SUCCESS:

The power of employee engagement is that it is closely connected to business results.

The results are overwhelming, and it’s clear that employee engagement plays a strong role in business success.

In particular, engagement can find support in the Service Profit Chain and the Balanced Scorecard. Both of these conceptual models demonstrate the power and impact of people practices and human capital on company performance.

For employee engagement, we classify the primary business outcomes into four categories.

When employees work in an environment in which they can focus their attention on their work and have a drive to do their best, organizations experience higher levels of productivity and profitability.

Engaged employees look for better ways to do their work, spend less time on wasted activities, and make effective use of resources.

In the end, companies deliver better products or services and have more resources left to invest in further improvements.

Although it is an important consideration, high financial compensation is not the only driver of increased employee retention.

As addressed previously, employees decide to stay with organizations for other reasons, such as growth and development opportunities, strong leadership, and meaningful work.

Turnover costs organizations millions of dollars each year, and engagement has a proven relationship to employee retention.

No one likes going into a store where the sales clerks are sullen, absent, or uncooperative. It’s easy to see why customers notice engaged employees and are more satisfied and willing to purchase again.

For example, Tom Labadie, director of training and development at Comp USA states, “When you walk into a store with high engagement scores, you can sense the positive tone. Employees whistle and smile,


they approach customers, and the store gives off that elusive approachable feeling that customers appreciate.”

Organizations with engaged employees have more satisfied customers, but it’s not just because employees have better interactions with customers.

Engaged employees are more likely to improve other critical factors affecting customer satisfaction, such as responsiveness, product quality, thought leadership, innovation, etc.

Finally, higher engagement translates into higher and faster revenue growth.

Engaged employees are more innovative and place more emphasis on meeting customer needs. The “what can I do better or differently” attitude of engaged employees versus the “it’s not in my job description” attitude of the unengaged simply leads to better financial performance.


RECOMMENDATIONS

Using the research to enhance engagement:

(1) Leveraging the global drivers: The emergence of the four global influencers helps orient a global

employer toward areas with the greatest potential impact on workforce engagement.

Throughout their operations, multinationals should look for both common threads of engagement across countries and distinct or unique drivers in each major cluster or location.

This can provide the framework for a global engagement strategy, lending cohesiveness, consistency and efficiency to engagement initiatives.

Strategic HR management practices across the organization also support a global employer brand, a sense of common corporate culture, a consistent basis for leadership training, more permeable internal boundaries for employees’ cross-unit moves, and other benefits.

Some of the hallmarks of organizations that excel in leveraging these four global drivers to enhance engagement:

(a) The work itself, including opportunities for development:

Engagement-focused companies have found ways to make work an

effective driver of employee engagement. For example, although these companies may have flattened their organizations, limiting the opportunities for traditional promotions and upward advancement, they allow employees to grow within a job through expanded training opportunities and to move laterally within the organization.

Particularly important in these companies is explaining how jobs fit into the overall mosaic of the functions and activities that bring services and products to customers, so employees can map out and understand how their contributions fit into the larger scheme of things.

These factors are in addition to the work itself, which may have intrinsic appeal to each employee.

(b) Confidence and trust in leadership:


Engaged employees see and experience their leaders acting in accord with the expressed values of the organization and allocating resources in ways that support strategy.

Strong leaders believe in acting in visible and transparent ways that generate involvement with customers and employees.

Leaders who can help employees see how strategy relates to various processes and procedures build engagement.

(c)Recognition and rewards:

Recognizing individual and group performance and contributions in

tangible and immediate ways enhances an employee’s sense of the organization’s appreciation and support of his or her efforts.

While competitive pay and cash bonuses are not, in and of themselves, engagement drivers, they should be structured so as to be internally fair and externally competitive and, therefore, not de-motivators.

Nonmonetary rewards, both formal and informal, are an effective part of a reward mix that supports engagement.

(d) Organizational communication:

In organizations with engaged workforces, information cascades from

top management to employees in a timely and orderly fashion, with processes established to build upward flow of information from employees to top management.

Supervisors are trained to actively disseminate information, handle questions and provide feedback – effective ways to build awareness, understanding and cooperation.

Communication is planned, yet it is flexible enough to meet the day today needs of information-thirsty employees and crafted to take into account the various learning styles within the organization and the communication vehicles preferred by employees (for example, face-to-face meetings, e-mail, intranets, print newsletters or regular home mailings).


LIMITATIONS

Every research study has certain limitations and the present study is no more exception. These are: -

Interviewing of the executive of top echelon position who are involved

in decision making busy in the Organization State of affair. So it is not

possible to contact all of those every busy executives.

The terminology used in the subject is highly technical in nature and

creates a lot of ambiguity.

Confidentiality of the management is the strongest hindrance to the

collection of data and scientific analysis of the study.

All the secondary data are required were not available.

Respondents were found hesitant in revealing opinion about their

engagement level.

In spite of all these limitations, I have made a humble attempt to present

an analytical picture of the study with some suggestion for the long run

implementation.


REFERANCE AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

Human Resource Management, R P Mohanty.

K Ashwathappa, (1997) Human Resource and Personnel Management, Tata McGraw-

Hill

John M. Ivancevich, Human Resource Management, Tata McGraw- Hill, 2004

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employee_engagement

http://retention.naukrihub.com/increase-employee-engagement.html http://www.infosys.com/iengage/platforms/Pages/employee-

engagement-platform.aspx http://www.opcuk.com/downloads/examples_of_employee_engageme

nt_approaches.pdf http://www.thomsons.asia/page/18008/asia/reward-news-

knowledge/employee-rewards-and-benefits-news/articles/poor-employee-engagement-damaging-to-organisations?fromSearch=true

Harter, 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, 87(2), 268-279

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employee_engagement

http://retention.naukrihub.com/increase-employee-engagement.html

http://www.infosys.com/iengage/platforms/Pages/employee-engagement-platform.aspx

http://www.infosys.com/iengage/platforms/Pages/employee-engagement-platform.aspx

http://www.opcuk.com/downloads/examples_of_employee_engagement_approaches.pdf

http://www.opcuk.com/downloads/examples_of_employee_engagement_approaches.pdf

http://www.thomsons.asia/page/18008/asia/reward-news-knowledge/employee-rewards-and-benefits-news/articles/poor-employee-engagement-damaging-to-organisations?fromSearch=true




APPENDICES

(1)

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR EMPLOYEES


A STUDY ON EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT

DEMOGRAPHIC DETAILS:

(1) NAME (Optional):

(2) AGE:

(A) 20-25 yrs (B) 26-30 yrs (C ) 31-35 yrs (D) 36 or more

yrs

(3) DEPARTMENT:

Please rate on a scale of 1-5 (Where 1 is “Very Bad” and 5 is “Excellent”)

against each question:

(1) Rate your satisfaction level with the rewards and recognition given at your

Company

(2) Please rate the challenge and motivation level in your job responsibility

(3) Rate as in the number of opportunities you had to learn and Grow

(4) Rate your Team Leader in terms of his/her cooperativeness & providing

regular work related feedback

(5) You feel that your company has open communication system, rate on a scale

of 1-5

THANK YOU


(2)

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR EXECUTIVES

A STUDY ON EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT


DEMOGRAPHIC DETAILS:

(1) NAME (Optional):

(2) AGE:

(A) 20-25 yrs (B) 26-30 yrs (C ) 31-35 yrs (D) 36 or more

yrs

(3) DEPARTMENT:

Rate the following statements on a scale of 1-5 (Where 1 is “Very Bad” and 5

is “Excellent”):

(1) Rate the effect of Rewards and Recognition on employees productivity

(2) Rate the effect of giving more challenging work on productivity

(3) Rate the effect of opportunities to learn & grow on Productivity

(4) Rate the effect of a cooperative & caring team leader on productivity of team

members

(5) Rate the effect of engagement level of employees towards reduction of

operational expense

(6) Rate the effect of engagement level of employees towards attrition rates

(7) Rate the effect of engagement level of employees towards absenteeism

THANK YOU

Shailja_Pandey_09020441101_D_49_HR

Documents

Transcript of Shailja_Pandey_09020441101_D_49_HR