Is Marriage an Opportunity for Futher Engagement?
By Chris Geary

In business, marriage occurs prior to engagement. The wrong marriage decision will prevent engagement, failure will therefore be much more likely. In the case of a dis-engaged leader, this will filter down into their team and set back progress and competitive advantage. In increasingly competitive global markets, no business can afford this.

Engagement leads to improved performance. This is primarily because employees are sufficiently emotionally and intellectually engaged in their roles. They will apply efforts beyond their contractual obligations to achieve above expectations. This engagement is found in employees feeling respected, knowing how to perform in their jobs and meet the expectations of customers. They see themselves working in an organisation that reflects their values and involves them in decision making. Key to this engagement is that first, employees must feel confidence in their leader(s). These leaders must be engaged to be able to instill this feeling by being sufficiently involved in their work and possessing the knowledge or ability to perform it, that they can demonstrate equivalent efforts and successes.

Lack of engagement is not just an individual issue. It affects teams of employees. A single un-engaged leader, non-performing in their role as a result, will lead to disengagement in a broader group as their efforts will show lower results, or their team(s) will see themselves unable to perform as they are being asked to. Current studies show 50% leaders being seen as effective, 42% as trustworthy and only 38% as showing a sincere interest in their employees. It is estimated by Hewitt that every un-engaged employee will cost a minimum of US$10,000 per year to their company. It is concerning, knowing this, that the global average for workforces being actively engaged is 21% (Hong Kong 9%, Singapore 17%, China 23%). If this filters through leadership to its teams, the exponential effect can clearly be shattering. In this case, you could say that engaged leaders are literal “pillars” in organisations.

It is crucial that the appointment of leaders considers engagement from day one. In “pillar” roles, companies must look to bring in the highest performing leader, whether from inside or outside the organisation. Cost saving in recruiting or incentive are a false economy. Interestingly, during the global financial crisis, morale fell in over 50% of organisations and the need for engagement was at its greatest. However, at the same time 45% of developing market and 19% of developed market organisations sited motivation as key to incentivisation in this period rather than financial incentive. The most able leader should be appointed that can most easily achieve the aspirations of the business that hired or appointed them. It could be said that if they easily achieve this then they will be most engaged and therefore give the greatest impact to their team in terms of engagement. The first 90 days is the most critical time for a leader to ensure their success in a role, however in terms of engagement, it might also be the greatest opportunity for impact.

Marriage in companies through appointment or hiring, is a key opportunity to build “pillars” for your organisation. Properly considering the engagement of the leader from day one and setting achievable targets to the most competent individuals will provide a great opportunity during what can be considered the most risky time for an executive.

(Sources: Aon Hewitt, Towers Watson, McKinsey, Harvard Business Review)