Breaking off the engagement: Study shows that even loyal employees become jaded if not treated well

Jun 01, 2012

All businesses want "engaged" employees -- those who are committed to the success of the company and are willing to go the extra mile to see it flourish. But there's a dark side to engagement that many organizations don't consider: Engaged employees can quickly become disengaged if they feel taken advantage of — and a formerly engaged employee can do more harm to the company than one who was never engaged to begin with.

That's a key finding in a new study conducted by Wayne Hochwarter, the Jim Moran Professor of Business Administration in the Florida State University College of Business. Hochwarter surveyed 1,000 people, in both blue- and white-collar occupations, to gain a clearer picture of the concept of employee engagement, its benefits for the employer, and its possible dangers when not managed well.

"Engaged work harder, are more creative and more committed, and they represent an important predictor of company productivity," he said. "Unquestionably, organizations with engaged workers have weathered recessionary pressures more successfully.

"However, those same organizations have to be sensitive to the fact that even model employees can 'give up' if they sense that they're being asked to do more and more, and with fewer resources, while comparatively little is being asked of their less-engaged colleagues."

In his study, Hochwarter found that engaged employees reported:

  • a 50 percent higher rate of job satisfaction;
  • a 45 percent higher rate of job performance;
  • a 40 percent higher rate of life satisfaction;
  • a 33 percent lower rate of turnover intention; and
  • a 30 percent higher rate of commitment to their employer.
The tricky part comes in keeping those employees engaged. Hochwarter's findings clearly illustrate that engaged workers, without needed company support and other resources, can begin to exhibit a number of undesirable attitudes and behaviors.

"Engagement often means taking on more tasks than one's less engaged coworkers, but with the expectation that the company will provide more of what is needed to assist along the way," he said. Without those additional resources, engaged employees began to display the following negative attributes:

  • a decline in helping behavior (50 percent lower);
  • increased anger at supervisors (35 percent higher);
  • a view that expectations are beyond one's capabilities (33 percent higher);
  • additional stress (30 percent higher); and
  • lower overall productivity (25 percent lower).
Put another way: Engaged employees can easily become disengaged if not managed properly.

Hochwarter cited the example of one study participant who falls into that category. The 32-year-old financial consultant wrote, "I really did my best, worked long hours, contributed something every day . . . but the more I did, the more resources they took from me and gave to other employees."

The difficult economic realities of the past few years have influenced engagement in both good and bad ways, said Hochwarter, whose field of expertise is organizational behavior, particularly with regard to employer-employee dynamics. Business leaders are learning more about generating employee engagement, he added; however, little is known about how it should be maintained and cultivated. Helping to fill that knowledge gap was the reason Hochwarter conducted his study.

Hochwarter offered several points for organizations to consider as they work to engage employees and keep them engaged.

"First, understand that getting employees engaged isn't like flipping a switch," he said. "Often, it takes a while for engagement to kick in, but it can be lost in only one incident. Second, realize that once-engaged employees who are now disengaged can cause more harm to a company than those who were never engaged.

"Third, getting employees engaged is like planting a tree: If you walk away from it, it's unlikely to grow. And finally, many leaders feel that managing engaged workers is easier than managing those who are not engaged. This is simply not the reality in most companies."

Explore further: New research shows sportswomen still second best to sportsmen... in the press

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Structure helps new employees adjust, study finds

Jul 18, 2011

With people often changing jobs and careers, organizations need to know how to help integrate and engage newcomers in order to retain them. A new University of Guelph study shows that new employees adjust better to their ...

How to avoid employee depression in a recession

Nov 29, 2010

As employees become increasingly anxious about job security and financial worries during an economic recession, satisfaction with the job they have, commitment to their company and engagement with their work are all affected ...

Recommended for you

Beyond human: Exploring transhumanism

Nov 25, 2014

What do pacemakers, prosthetic limbs, Iron Man and flu vaccines all have in common? They are examples of an old idea that's been gaining in significance in the last several decades: transhumanism. The word ...

User comments : 7

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

tthb
1 / 5 (1) Jun 01, 2012
"They"/Religion, sure did make it way too hard; flint hard
tthb
not rated yet Jun 01, 2012
That's Real; that (the rest) is not-
Vendicar_Decarian
2 / 5 (4) Jun 02, 2012
It is important to do research into how to keep the farm animals docile and productive.

Bob_Kob
5 / 5 (2) Jun 02, 2012
That's Real; that (the rest) is not-


Is this guy like a retarded spambot or something? None of his comments have any fluidity or relevance to the topic.
Vendicar_Decarian
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 02, 2012
Reading comprehension isn't one of his strong points.

"None of his comments have any fluidity or relevance to the topic." - Kobob

Keeping the cattle dumb is key to keeping them docile.
A_Paradox
5 / 5 (2) Jun 04, 2012
Perhaps 'tthb' is trying to use translation software to post in English ??

As to the article itself, I reckon this sort of managerialism is asinine. I mean, if you want to know how your workers are feeling about their work and the organisation, why not just _go and ask them_! The key strategy needed for dealing with people is to treat each person _as_ a person - and not as some remote thing or other.

The large Australian Government organisation I work for - 'the Sausage Factory' I call it when out and about, did an employee engagement survey. It has taken six months for the results to become available. Now the managerialists want to run 'focus groups' to find out what some people think about issues raised by the survey.

Hells bells! If the workers were allowed access to an on-line discussion forum, current issues would be discoverable _in real time_ just be lurking on line.
Why is that so hard to understand?
AWaB
5 / 5 (1) Jun 04, 2012
This is a great study. Unfortunately, most managers don't really understand people or their motivations.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.