LinkedIn Dialog
Group: Corporate Social Responsibility

Discussion: Engaged employees put 57% more effort into their job and are 87% less likely to resign than disengaged employees. More from PwC's new 'Keys to CR employee engagement report' http://pwc.to/1eQMSWH

Burgess COMMENTARY

Peter Burgess

Engaged employees put 57% more effort into their job and are 87% less likely to resign than disengaged employees. More from PwC's new 'Keys to CR employee engagement report' http://pwc.to/1eQMSWH

Katura Hudson ... Public Relations Manager, PwC US ... Top Contributor

Johannes Strack, Jesenia Brown and 22 others like this

7 comments James Cooper James

James Cooper Business Development Manager at X-FORCES Ltd

Almost all business is about people and the ability to inspire, cajole, educate and motivate your employees is priceless. If business can realise that empowered employees will be more successful then all the better!!!

Owen Devine Owen Owen Devine Head of Service Delivery

this is an important aspect of learning organisations in peter senges' the fifth discipline, I would posit that this is one of the areas that organisations need to recognise, would I call is CSR? no, it is a hard edged business decision.

JC Wandemberg Ph.D. JC JC Wandemberg Ph.D. CEO Sustainable Systems International (SSI). Transforming goal-oriented individuals into ideal-seeking visionaries!

The question is: How to fully engage your employees? The answer: By changing the genetic makeup of your organization from behaviour-restrictive to behaviour-enhancing. Cheers! JC

Elizabeth Abunaw Elizabeth Elizabeth Abunaw MBA Candidate, University of Chicago Booth School of Business

Thank you for posting this. I think that not only is it beneficial to showing the ROI of CSR in an organization but can also give non-profit organizations a metric for the ROI of partnerships. Like (1) Linda Hall likes this

JC Wandemberg Ph.D. JC JC Wandemberg Ph.D. CEO Sustainable Systems International (SSI). Transforming goal-oriented individuals into ideal-seeking visionaries!

Employee engament is a consequence of the organization's DNA.

All organizations (even non human ones) have one of only two types of DNA. They are either variety-reducing or variety enhancing (e.g., Black holes are variety reducing while the universe is variety-enhancing). Ever since the industrial revolution most organizations' DNA became variety-reducing (i.e., bureaucratic) because that was the best genetic makeup for that type of environment (i.e., non-turbulent). Once turbulence became part of our environment (since the 1960s), organizations began to realize the inadequacies of this type of genetic makeup (i.e, bureaucratic) and have been trying to change ever since. However, unless the responsibility for the work being done is given to those actually doing the work, no matter how much phenotypic change the organization goes through, its DNA will remain variety-reducing (i.e., bureaucratic) .

Cheers! JC

Katheryne Molina Medina Katheryne Katheryne Molina Medina CSR, Reputation, Citizenship & Stakeholders Engagement

This subject comes very much alive and becomes a powerful tool when talking about employee branding... the real thing of course

Peter Burgess Peter Burgess Founder/CEO at TrueValueMetrics developing Multi Dimension Impact Accounting

I trained with Cooper Brothers about 50 years ago in London. Cooper Brothers merged to be a part of Coopers and Lybrand which in turn became a part of PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PwC). PwC and the three other mega accounting firms have established a very dangerous international oligopoly that is, more than anything else in the business of making wealth for the members of these firms. 'Employee engagement' is a wonderful conversation and justification for the quite abusive workplace conditions that exist in the accountancy profession, especially for the junior professional staff. There was a time when the 'partners' had a huge personal responsibility for the professional integrity of the firm and the work it does ... partners had unlimited liability for any misfeasance of the firm. Now the big firms have a global name recognition, but in reality the name has little meaning because a brand like PwC is made up of many hundreds of small partnerships with limited liability and not much of assets in any single legal entity. Worse, the big firms seem willing to attach their name to anything that will earn them professional fees. I can go on ... but I will conclude by saying that I was really proud of my association with Coopers and the international accounting profession until the late 1980s when I realized that the accounting profession had gone, and the muscle of these firms was now devoted almost exclusively to profit / fee maximization at the expense of the critical contribution that the accountancy profession should and could be making in the service of a responsible high performance society and global economy. Sure ... motivated employees are good for any business, but more and more engagement under the watchful eyes of the firm may not be good for the family and for society. This paper may be glossing over the dark underside of employee 'engagement' and volunteerism ...

Peter Burgess ... TrueValueMetrics Multi Dimension Impact Accounting Delete 10 hours ago