Employee Progress Drives Engagement

1031 Sterling Road, Suite 203, Herndon VA 20170
Page 1 of 10 Phone: (703) 435-5911 Fax: (703) 435-9380
© 2012, HumanR – Reproduction without permission is prohibited
Incremental Wins – Exponential Impact
How Employee Progress
Drives Employee Engagement
By Matt Evans
Senior Consultant
HumanR, Inc.
Executive Summary
In a Harvard Business Review article, “The Power of Small Wins,” Teresa Amabile and Steven Kramer
(2011) highlight how important it is for workers to feel as though they are making ‘progress’ on a
frequent basis, noting that progress in meaningful work is a key driver of organizational performance1
.
Using Amabile’s and Kramer’s work as a foundation, HumanR sought to explore two questions:
1. What is the link between employee progress and employee engagement?
2. How should managers target their efforts to promote employee progress?
In 2011, HumanR conducted a survey of sixteen professional services organizations to better understand
employee engagement. In addition to asking typical engagement questions about compensation,
supervision, and recognition, we asked respondents how often they make progress and how often they
encounter obstacles to better understand the link between engagement and progress.
Based on the data from 6,000 respondents, we found a strong link between employee perceptions of their
daily progress at work and their level of engagement. The data also revealed key drivers of workplace
progress as well as barriers inhibiting employees from making greater progress.
Finally, the data provided clear insights on actions that managers can take to better facilitate employee
progress and ultimately improve engagement and performance.
1
Teresa Amabile and Steven Kramer, “The Power of Small Wins,” Harvard Business Review May 2011: 71-80.

Page 2 of 10 Phone: (703) 435-5911 Fax: (703) 435-9380
Introduction
The impact of employee engagement on organizations is both well documented and striking. From less
unplanned leave to greater profitability2
, a highly-engaged cadre of employees delivers quantifiably better
results to organizations of all types. Conversely, a disengaged workforce yields the opposite results.
While compensation, buy-in to the organization’s mission, and other organization-level drivers are often
the result of high-level, organization-wide actions, the individual manager is pivotal to the level of
engagement of his or her employees.
As a result of their research, Amabile and Kramer (2011) were able to ferret out the difference between a
“good day” and a “bad day” at work. “Good days” are days in which people “feel happy, are intrinsically
motivated by the work itself, and have positive perceptions of their colleagues and the organization.”
“Bad days” are characterized by “frustration, fear, and sadness.” Not surprisingly, Amabile and Kramer
found that people are more likely to be creative and productive on good days than bad days.
Amabile and Kramer also found the single largest predictor of a good day is whether or not employees
made progress in their work – that is, they took steps forward in either their own work or in their team’s
work. In fact, in 76% of days in which workers report leaving work in a good mood, they report that
progress was made. However, on 67% of bad days, employees reported experiencing setbacks or
obstacles. The researchers further argue that “knowing what serves to catalyze and nourish progress –
and what does the opposite – turns out to be the key to effectively managing people and their work.”
In our research we found a strong link between employees’ perceived level of progress and their level of
engagement. Additionally, we identified key drivers and barriers to employee progress. Based on our
findings, we make suggestions for managers to facilitate an engaging environment by enabling and
supporting employee progress.
2
“Motivating Employees to Go the Extra Mile: The Manager’s Role in Engagement,” Tom Davenport and Steven
Harding, Towers Watson, 2010.

Page 3 of 10 Phone: (703) 435-5911 Fax: (703) 435-9380
Methodology
As a part of HumanR’s ongoing engagement research, we surveyed sixteen organizations with over 6,000
respondents to further understand factors that influence employees’ engagement levels. HumanR asked
employees to respond to items in several categories, including My Job, My Immediate Supervisor,
Organization-Wide Leadership and Direction, Compensation and Benefits, etc. To examine the
contribution ‘progress’ plays in employee engagement, the survey asked employees to respond to items
on barriers to productivity, and two questions related to progress and obstacles. Those questions were:
In a typical two-week period, I leave work feeling I have made progress on the following number
of days (Employees could select any number from 0 through 10).
In a typical two-week period, I encounter obstacles to making progress on the following number
of days (Employees could select any number from 0 through 10).
The HumanR Engagement Index
HumanR has studied employee engagement throughout the last decade, resulting in a proprietary
Employee Engagement Index. The index yields an engagement score for each survey participant and
allows us to group respondents as Highly Engaged, Engaged, or Disengaged:
Highly Engaged Employees demonstrate an emotional commitment to the organization. They
tend to be self-starters, to take on work that is not necessarily a part of their job, and to be loyal.
Engaged Employees demonstrate a rational approach to the value of their job, continuing to
commit for so long as it appears to be in their best interest.
Disengaged Employees are neither happy nor productive, but find it harder to leave their job than
to stay; they tend to be cynical and to be harmful to morale.
This survey sample resulted in the following engagement distribution, which fit within our existing
normative data3
:
45 percent (n=2,758) were Highly Engaged,
39 percent (n=2,375) were Engaged, and
17 percent (n=1,022) were Disengaged.
3
HumanR’s historical normative ranges for engagement levels are: Disengaged: 6%-22%; Engaged: 32%-53%;
Highly Engaged: 32%-61%

Page 4 of 10 Phone: (703) 435-5911 Fax: (703) 435-9380
Findings
Linking Progress and Engagement
As expected, the results indicate a strong relationship between engagement level and progress. The more
days out of ten an individual reports making progress, the more likely he or she is to be highly engaged.
Conversely, the more days out of ten an individual reports encountering obstacles, the more likely s/he is
to score lower on engagement.
We also combined progress and obstacles into a single measure, referred to hereafter as “Net Progress.”
Net Progress is the difference between the number of days the survey respondent reports making progress
and the number of days the survey respondent reports encountering obstacles. Figure 1 demonstrates the
relationship between Net Progress and level of engagement.
Figure 1
At the high end of Net Progress, i.e. +5 days or more, the number of employees who are highly engaged
overtakes and passes the number of employees who are engaged. Managers, therefore, may wish to
consider +5 Net Progress as a target.
Approximately half of the survey population reports +5 Net Progress or greater, which indicates that in
addition to being quantifiable and meaningful, this target is also attainable.
Driving Net Progress
As seen above, a relationship between Net Progress and engagement clearly exists. Delving deeper into
the survey data, we found relationships between individual items and Net Progress. The five items most
highly correlated to Net Progress are listed below:
1. At work my ideas and views seem to count.
2. The organization does a good job of setting customer expectations at the outset of an assignment.
3. I am able to maintain an effective balance between my personal life and my work life.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
-5 and Less
(n=246)
-4 to +4
(n=2909)
+5 and Greater
(n=2774)
#ofRespondents
Net Progress Range
Net Progress and Engagement Level
Disengaged
Engaged
Highly Engaged

Page 5 of 10 Phone: (703) 435-5911 Fax: (703) 435-9380
4. I am satisfied with the level of teamwork provided by others in the organization outside of my
immediate workgroup/department.
5. Within the scope of my job I have the appropriate level of freedom to use my own judgment and
take action.
To better understand the relationship between ratings of these items and progress, consider these
responses from five separate survey respondents who rated them a “5” (on a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 is the
highest rating). Note their verbatim responses and how they positively might affect one’s perception of
progress.
Table 1: Key Drivers and Representative Positive Comments
Item
Item Rating
(1 to 5)
Net Progress
(-10 to 10)
Verbatim Comment: What do you like best
about working at your organization?
Individual A
At work my ideas
and views seem
to count.
5 6
Willingness to listen to new ideas and a
culture that promotes innovation in
processes 'working smarter, not harder.’
Individual B
The organization
does a good job
of setting
customer
expectations at
the outset of an
assignment.
5 9
The work is challenging and enjoyable. My
supervisor is excellent to work for and
ensures I have the tools I need to succeed.
My customer has placed a high priority on
getting the job done, but is reasonable in
their expectations. At this point, I am
enjoying my job tremendously and don't
expect anything to change in terms of my
feelings with regard to this situation.
Individual C
I am able to
maintain an
effective balance
between my
personal life and
my work life.
5 6
I had a work-life balance issue emerge this
year that required me to adjust my schedule
and responsibilities and I have been fully
supported in this. I have never had a hint of
worry that if I ask for more flexibility I would
put my employment in jeopardy. This has
motivated me to make sure I work extra
hard so that the company knows that this
decision to support me was a good one.
Individual D
I am satisfied
with the level of
teamwork
provided by
others in the
organization
outside of my
immediate
workgroup/
department.
5 6
I enjoy the collaboration between the
project managers, instructional designers,
artists, programmers, and QA specialists. I
also like the relaxed work environment and
how we pitch in when other artists are
swamped with work.

Page 6 of 10 Phone: (703) 435-5911 Fax: (703) 435-9380
Item
Item Rating
(1 to 5)
Net Progress
(-10 to 10)
Verbatim Comment: What do you like best
about working at your organization?
Individual E
Within the scope
of my job I have
the appropriate
level of freedom
to use my own
judgment and
take action.
5 9
The autonomy to do my job and the support
I receive to provide excellent service to our
client units. I feel my supervisor's beliefs are
in line with mine in regards to providing
assistance beyond our sample data
collection mission. For instance, I am free
and encouraged to provide expertise to
clients that not only makes our services
more valuable but also improves the unit.
Note how other individuals’ negative responses to these items might negatively affect their perception of
progress.
Table 2: Key Drivers and Representative Negative Comments
Item
Item Rating
(1 to 5)
Net Progress
(-10 to 10)
Verbatim Comment: What can be done to
make the organization an even better
place to work?
Individual V
At work my ideas
and views seem to
count.
2 -4
Address concerns and desires that are
identified by the employee . . . overall, this
organization has become the single most
dissatisfying, disheartening, and
demotivating workplace that I have ever
experienced.
Individual W
The organization
does a good job of
setting customer
expectations at the
outset of an
assignment.
2 -2
In my experience the management of my
organization promises many things to the
client and then does not provide the
resources or managerial support to get
them done, which means that we are
always behind schedule and under budget
and cutting corners. This leads to a high
stress work environment.
Individual X
I am able to
maintain an
effective balance
between my
personal life and my
work life.
2 -6
People do not take ownership of their
responsibilities, thus making others take on
more than they should. Some people get to
go home on time, the rest struggle to keep
the boat afloat for the good of all.
Management's role in trying to get
everything done well at once results in
nothing done well.

Page 7 of 10 Phone: (703) 435-5911 Fax: (703) 435-9380
Item
Item Rating
(1 to 5)
Net Progress
(-10 to 10)
Verbatim Comment: What can be done to
make the organization an even better
place to work?
Individual Y
I am satisfied with
the level of
teamwork provided
by others in the
organization outside
of my immediate
workgroup/
department.
1 -9
This year . . . has brought disrespect to our
business unit as well as outright
inflammatory language and
frustration/defensiveness on collective
conference calls etc. Corporate finance
office has lack of knowledge of their
accounting software and doesn't take
advice from my 8 years of experience.
Customer requests are being ignored,
showing lack of responsiveness as well as
outright disrespect for deadlines.
Individual Z
Within the scope of
my job I have the
appropriate level of
freedom to use my
own judgment and
take action.
1 -8
The bureaucracy is a constant obstacle to
meeting customer needs - the workers are
made to support the bureaucrats rather
than the other way around. Among other
things, this results in us having a
ridiculously high overhead multiplier, which
makes us cost-uncompetitive.
Barriers to Making Progress
We noted earlier the importance of +5 days of Net Progress, the point at which high engagement becomes
most prevalent. We asked respondents to select five barriers from a list of 25 that have the largest impact
on their productivity. We then compared the results of individuals with less than 5 days of Net Progress
with individuals with greater than 5 days of Net Progress. The following table shows those barriers that
present the largest gap between each set of individuals.
Table 3: Key Barriers Preventing +5 Net Progress
Percentage of Respondents Mentioning Barrier as an Issue
Net Progress = +5 Days or More
(n=2778)
Net Progress = Less Than +5 Days
(n=3161)
Gap
Responding to crises 9.5% 20.2% 10.7%
Lack of clear priorities/goals 5.9% 16.5% 10.6%
Miscommunication among
work groups/departments
9.2% 18.1% 8.9%
Continual need to seek
decisions or approval from
higher authority
6.3% 15.0% 8.7%
Lack of information 11.7% 20.3% 8.6%

Page 8 of 10 Phone: (703) 435-5911 Fax: (703) 435-9380
Consider the impact that these barriers impose on employees as they attempt to make progress in their
work and the high frequency in which they occur for individuals in our survey who make less than +5
days of Net Progress. To move employees into a Net Progress range where they are most likely to be
highly engaged, managers can focus on these barriers which impede desired levels of progress.
The Disengaged
As stated previously, disengaged employees are difficult to motivate and can be harmful to morale. An
additional item of interest from the data shows the effect of increased perception of progress on the
disengaged population. Our findings show that regardless of their level of progress, the disengaged
population remains disengaged.
Figure 2
As seen in the previous chart, no clear link exists between progress and disengagement. We actually see
more disengaged employees at +9 days of Net Progress than at -9 days of Net Progress. Disengaged
employees report dissatisfaction across a variety of factors, where our research has shown that this is
often due to poor person/job fit. Because progress likely has little effect on disengaged employees,
managers should instead focus on facilitating the progress of individuals who are already engaged.
0
50
100
150
200
250
-10 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NumberofEmployees
Net Progress
Disengaged Population

Page 9 of 10 Phone: (703) 435-5911 Fax: (703) 435-9380
Implications for Managers
Amabile and Kramer state that a positive inner work life drives performance, that performance is
dependent on making progress in meaningful work, which in turn, yields a positive inner work life. They
refer to this as the progress loop. According to Amabile and Kramer, one of the goals of managers in
creating a high performance work environment is to facilitate the progress loop.
Implications From Our Research
Our findings lead to some practical implications for managers to help them facilitate progress.
Ask employees about progress and obstacles. But, as Amabile and Kramer note, check “in” on
them, do not check “up” on them. Be seen as a facilitator of success, not a micromanager.
Manage customer expectations. As noted in the findings, setting customer expectations
correlates with Net Progress. A poorly written set of requirements, an underwhelming service
level agreement, or an inability to hold customers to what was agreed to at the outset of a project
can result in rework, overwork, and a seemingly infinite cycle of frustration.
Make work meaningful and rewarding to the employee. Work to match employee career and
role expectations to work they are performing. Most people accept job offers based on their
expectations of what the job will entail. When people find themselves in roles other than they
expect, they may find the work less meaningful than the work they originally intended to pursue.
This disconnect between expectations and roles can lead employees toward the perception that
they are not making meaningful progress.
Maximize autonomy whenever possible. Ensure employees feel they can make decisions that
allow them to move forward without a burdensome approval process. Amabile and Kramer note
that their model manager “checks in with,” and does not “check up on” his or her team. Our
survey findings reveal, in both barriers and item ratings, the importance of empowerment as it
relates to progress. From an employee perceiving that he or she must waste time while awaiting
approval to an employee feeling demotivated by a perceived lack of responsibility, a lack of
employee empowerment can stall progress.
Promote teamwork among departments. Particularly in large, complex projects, teamwork
among departments is crucial for moving forward effectively. Missed deadlines, overburdened
team members, and a perception of inequitable workload are consequences of poor teamwork.
Managers should advocate for their team and work with other departments’ management to
ensure accountability and an equitable distribution of workload.
Focus on what has been achieved. Managers who are “engaging” focus on positive outcomes
rather than negatives. Focus on what has been done more than what has not been done to create
an atmosphere conducive to rewarding progress.
Set short term goals that are achievable. Think in terms of ten day increments. Long-term
projects can seem interminable, and progress can seem nonexistent. Ensure employees can
identify when they have made progress by setting frequent, reachable targets.
Ensure adequate resources to achieve goals. It is the manager’s responsibility to ensure that
time, money, equipment, and social and political capital are appropriately managed in a way that
facilitates progress.

Page 10 of 10 Phone: (703) 435-5911 Fax: (703) 435-9380
Remember that some people will remain unsatisfied, regardless of progress. The disengaged
will generally remain disengaged, regardless of a manager’s efforts to facilitate progress. Instead
of spending resources to facilitate their progress, concentrate on helping those individuals who
are already engaged become more highly engaged.
Conclusion
HumanR’s research establishes a strong link between progress and engagement. To improve employee
engagement, managers should focus on creating an environment where each employee has the
opportunity to make progress in the work s/he finds meaningful. The goal is to build a progress-oriented
environment which results in higher levels of engagement, and ultimately, higher levels of performance.
-------------------------
About HumanR
Founded in 1975, HumanR is a management consulting firm with a focus on organizational development.
Our goal is to help organizational leaders connect their people to their business results – to connect the
dots between data and people, and between people and organizational performance.
Since 1996 we have had a presence on the web, performing employee engagement surveys and providing
customized 360s for leadership development. Over this period we have enhanced our services by
developing a variety of unique value adds, including our proprietary engagement index, our normative
databases, and our extensive selection of leadership and management trainings.
In 2009 HumanR was named the Woman Owned Small Business of the Year by the USDA’s Food and
Nutrition Service for our work in conducting 360 feedback and coaching.
If you have any questions, please contact one of the following individuals:
Burgess Levin Mary Saily Matt Evans
Senior Executive Consultant Executive Consultatnt & CEO Senior Consultant
blevin@humanr.com msaily@humanr.com mevans@humanr.com
(703) 435-5911 x102 (703) 435-5911 x104 (703) 435-5911 x114

Employee Progress Drives Engagement

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Semelhante a Employee Progress Drives Engagement

Semelhante a Employee Progress Drives Engagement (20)

Último

Último (20)

Employee Progress Drives Engagement