leveraging employee engagement through a talent management
TRANSCRIPT
Leveraging Employee Engagement through a Talent Management Strategy: Optimizing Human Capital through
Human Resources and Organization Development Strategy in a Field Study
A dissertation submitted
by Susan L. Sweem
to Benedictine University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of
Doctor of Philosophy in
Organization Development
This dissertation has been accepted for the faculty of
Benedictine University.
'eter F. Sorensen Jr., Ph.D Chair
May 17, 2009
jrson, Ph.D. Committee member
May 17, 2009
May 17,2009
UMI Number: 3349408
Copyright 2009 by
Sweem, Susan L.
All rights reserved.
INFORMATION TO USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy
submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and
photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
®
UMI UMI Microform 3349408
Copyright 2009 by ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest LLC 789 E. Eisenhower Parkway
PO Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
© Copyright 2009 Susan L. Sweem
ii
Abstract
In the past, the human resources function of most organizations has been viewed as
administrators handling paperwork instead of business partners with management.
Yet, most companies have a mission or vision statement that states people are their
most valuable asset. If this is true, the development and concern of employees in any
organization would have the highest strategic priority and employee engagement
within those organizations would be very high. Unfortunately, many organizations
that claim to hold employees as their most valuable asset do not engage their
employees and, as a result, they are underperforming.
The human resource departments should be intricately involved with strategically
planning and implementing human capital programs. If human resources within
organizations want to participate in the formulation of organizational strategy, they
will need to enact a change in the human resources role. Human resources must
partner with organization development in order to integrate organization development
principles and practices into the mainstream. This is a fundamental building block of
talent management strategy.
This field study explores how talent management and employee engagement are
defined and investigates how a talent management strategy affects employee
engagement within a US service unit of a coatings/chemical company. It also
iii
explores how human resources (HR) and organization development (OD) can support
a talent management strategy.
Using a mixed methods approach of implementing various interventions within the
service unit and comparing the results with the other US business units through
survey data and semi-structured interviews, the findings conclude that the key
components of talent management are a continuously improving work environment,
an open climate and clear top communication. The components of the engagement
construct are: A supervisor who coaches; employee development; transparent trust;
meaningful and challenging work; and commitment. Based upon these constructs and
this field study, a talent management strategy does significantly increase employee
engagement. Further, when these two constructs are combined, they drive
environmental and cultural organization change. Finally, the research demonstrates
that talent management is strategic HR/OD. As a result, a model is proposed in which
talent management strategy is rooted within HR/OD strategy. In turn, HR/OD
strategy is embedded within organizational strategy.
iv
Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge the contribution of key individuals who gave me
guidance and support throughout this dissertation process and journey. First, I thank
my husband, Steve, and our three children, Tyler, Kristin and Alex who shared
sacrifices, stresses and celebrations along the way. Your never-ending encouragement
and support was instrumental in allowing me to spread my wings and complete my
dreams. Learning is a life long experience and I hope I can support you just as you
have me wherever your learning journey takes you. I love you all so much.
Second, I acknowledge the assistance of my committee: Dr. Peter Sorensen, Dr.
Therese Yaeger and Dr. Philip Anderson. Each one of you offered valuable input
while also providing support and encouragement throughout this process.
Third, I thank Dr. George Hay for his beneficial assistance and coaching throughout
my journey. Your "good cheer" and positive affirmation were most appreciated.
In addition to these individuals, I acknowledge my manager as well as my colleagues
in the organization in which I worked during this process for supporting my research.
I thank you for your willing participation in interviews, workshops and other
activities.
Finally, I thank my fellow Cohort 6 members for their support and encouragement
throughout our time together. We trusted the process and made it together!
Dedication
To Steve, Tyler, Kristin and Alex -
Because of your never-ending love and support, I have been able to spread my wings
and soar!
vii
Table of Contents
Leveraging Employee Engagement through a Talent Management Strategy: Optimizing Human Capital through Human Resources and Organization Development Strategy in a Field Study i Abstract iii Acknowledgements v Dedication vii Table of Contents viii List of Figures x List of Tables xi Chapter 1: Introduction 1
Introduction 1 Background 2 Research Proposal 11
Chapter 2: Literature Review 16 Talent Management 16 Employee Engagement 25 Talent Management and Its Relationship to Employee Engagement 31 How Can a Talent Management Strategy Drive Employee Engagement and Influence Organizational Strategy? 33
Resource-based Theory 35 Integrated Strategic Change Theory 38 Built-To-Change Theory 40 Talentship 42 The Impact and Practicalities of Talent Management Theories 45
A Model for Leveraging Engagement Through a Talent Management Strategy... 49 Chapter 3: Research Approach and Methods 53
Research Approach 53 Field Study 56
Research Questions 60 Design 60 Data Collection and Analysis 68
Summary 92 Chapter 4: Findings and Results 94
Organization of Field Study Findings 94 Summary of Results 95 Quantitative Survey Results 100
Engagement Construct Factor Analysis 101 Talent Management Construct Factor Analysis 124
Quantitative Findings 140 Engagement and Talent Management Constructs 140 Talent Management Model 142
viii
Quantitative Limitations 146 Qualitative Results/Findings 147
Supporting Qualitative Themes for the Talent Management Construct 150 Supporting Qualitative Themes for the Employee Engagement Construct 158 Talent Management Strategy 174
Intervention Results/Findings 175 Supporting Interventions for the Talent Management Construct 175 Supporting Interventions for the Employee Engagement Construct 180 Summary of Intervention Findings 187
Summary of Triangulation of Results and Findings 187 Summary 192
Chapter 5: Discussion 193 Introduction 193 Summary of Key Findings 193
Talent Management Positively Affects Employee Engagement 194 Impact of Results on the Field Study and the Key Findings 202
Limitations of the Study 213 Summary 215
Chapter 6: Conclusion, Implications and Future Research 216 Conclusion 216 Implications 217 Future Research 220 Contributions of this Study 221
Appendix A: Timeline for CSU Study 222 Appendix B: Survey Questionnaires 224 Appendix C: Interview Questionnaires 255 Appendix D: Supplemental Statistical Data 262 Reference List 277
ix
List of Figures
Figure 1. Talent Management Model 50 Figure 2. Axial Coding Framework 90 Figure 3. Selective Coding toward a Central Category 91 Figure 4. Means for Overall Engagement including Commitment 122 Figure 5. Means for Coaching Supervisor 122 Figure 6. Means for Performance Development 123 Figure 7. Means for Transparent Trust 123 Figure 8. Means for Challenging and Meaningful Accomplishments 124 Figure 9. Means for Continuous Work Environment Improvement 136 Figure 10. Means for Open Climate 136 Figure 11. Means for Communication; Clear Top Management Direction 137 Figure 12. Key Talent Management Themes that Affect Employee Engagement... 148 Figure 13. Qualitative Key Themes that Link to the Talent Management and Employee Engagement Constructs 149 Figure 14. Talent Management Model Dimensions and Corresponding Talent Management and Employee Engagement Constructs 189 Figure 15. Talent Management Defined Through Practice and Theory 196 Figure 16. Employee Engagement Defined through Practice and Theory 199 Figure 17. Strategic Talent Management Model 201
x
List of Tables
Table 1. Definitions of Talent Management 20 Table 2. Definitions of Employee Engagement 30 Table 3. Employee Engagement Survey Questions 76 Table 4. Survey Response Rate 82 Table 5. Open Coding Categories 88 Table 6. Talent Management and Employee Engagement Drivers and Supporting Dimensions 96 Table 7. Engagement Dimension and Corresponding Survey Questions 102 Table 8. Engagement Construct: Total Variance Explained 108 Table 9. Engagement Construct 109 Table 10. Engagement and Commitment Constructs: Total Variance Explained... 112 Table 11. Engagement and Commitment Construct 113 Table 12. Cronbach's Alpha for the Engagement Construct 114 Table 13. Validation of the Engagement Construct based on Survey Questions 116 Table 14. Means for Engagement Dimensions 120 Table 15. Percentage of Survey Respondents that Agree with the Statement under each Engagement Dimension 121 Table 16. Talent Management Dimension Survey Questions 125 Table 17. Talent Management Construct: Total Variance Explained 128 Table 18. Talent Management Construct 129 Table 19. Cronbach's Alpha for the Talent Management Construct 130 Table 20. Validation of the Talent Management Construct Based on Survey Questions
131 Table 21. Means for Talent Management Dimensions 134 Table 22. Percentage of Survey Respondents that Agree with the Statement under each Talent Management Dimension 134 Table 23. ANOVA Results of Talent Management and Engagement CSU Questions
138
xi
Chapter 1: Introduction Introduction
Change is often perceived as not only necessary for progression forward but also
essential for survival (Falkenberg, Stensaker, Meyer, & Haueng, 2005). Organizations
strive to become better and better, but in order to become the best they can be, change
must occur. Change can be viewed as negative or positive and, in some cases in order
to move forward, it becomes both for those involved in the process. However, for
organizations to become the "best," the change must ultimately result in a positive
stance. So often it is the behavior of the organization that drives the employee talent
and ultimate success.
The success of any organization relies on strategy (Worley, Hitchin, & Ross, 1996). It
is important for functions within an organization to collaborate and partner in order to
build and implement a company's strategy. Human Resources (HR) is no exception.
Organizations must change their human resources focus from one of administration
towards one of developing business partner strategies in order to integrate
organization development principles and practices into the mainstream. This is a
fundamental building block of a talent management strategy which involves both
employee and organization development (McCauley & Wakefield, 2006). It begins
with a focus on commitment, engagement and accountability (Ready & Conger,
2007). As organization development (OD) has evolved and connected with HR, it has
focused on aligning its practices in multiple roles and directly affecting firm
1
2
performance (Lawler & Worley, 2006). So many organizations have a vision or
mission statement that states people are their most valuable asset. If this is true, the
development and concern of employees in any organization would have the highest
strategic priority and employee engagement within those organizations would be very
high. Many surveys conducted by consulting firms consistently state that high
employee engagement enhances organizational performance and contributes to the
bottom line (Debunking the Myths of Employee Engagement, 2006; Employee
Engagement Report 2006,2006; Gebauer, 2006). Why is it then that many
organizations that claim to hold employees as their most valuable asset do not engage
them and employees are, in fact, underperforming?
As human resources begins to focus on developing its most valuable resource (i.e.
employees), how does a talent management strategy affect employee engagement?
What is talent management and what is employee engagement? What is the affect of
talent management on organizational strategy? These are questions that should be
answered in order to develop an effective talent management strategy that promotes
employee engagement and drives organization effectiveness.
Background
This is a field study of a country service unit, CSU, within a large, multinational
coatings and chemical company, CoatCo. CoatCo is foreign-owned and
headquartered in Europe. The organization has been experiencing dramatic change as
3
it is refocusing on its core product competencies of coatings and chemicals. In 2007,
it divested a pharmaceutical division that had been known as the cash cow of the
company throughout the 1980s and 1990s. However, this pharmaceutical organization
had only niche products and markets with limited expansion possibilities. As a result
it was sold to another pharmaceutical organization.
In January of 2008, CoatCo acquired a global coatings organization that increased its
size and revenues by one third. This confirmed the direction of the organization
towards becoming one of the largest coatings and chemicals companies in the world.
Originally, CoatCo had its roots in Europe—as early as the late 1700s. Through
acquisitions, the company grew and expanded its products in both chemicals and
pharmaceuticals. For the past fifteen years CoatCo had been highly decentralized and
each business unit ran its own business as a separate entity. Talent was "home grown"
as technical and functional career tracks allowed individuals to advance, although
typically it was only within one business unit. Employees did not transfer across
business unit boundaries. Historically, employees had been loyal to the company with
tenure averaging over 11 years. Based upon its European roots, job security was a
given, even in the US. Employees were taken care of from cradle to grave. With poor
financial results and the downturn of economic times in 2001 and 2002, CoatCo
began to address a need for a new business strategy.
4
In May of 2003, a new CEO was appointed and, for the first time, an outside
candidate was selected. This gentleman was considered young by company standards;
he was not nearing retirement and he had multiple years of global experience in
different industries. He was not "home grown" and would become the outside change
agent the company needed in order to move the organization forward with growth and
sustainability.
The CEO's basic philosophy with respect to recruiting senior management teams was
to find people who were curious, who did not necessarily know all the answers but
showed willingness to look for innovative solutions, were committed to change and
possessed a passion for quality. He reconfigured his senior management team by
hiring an outside candidate for the position of Senior Vice President of Human
Resources in June, 2004.
In the past, the VP of HR had simply been a holding position for individuals who
were waiting to retire regardless of their prior experience or expertise. Human
Resources did not have the respect of the organization and certainly did not sit at the
table with other senior leaders. It was strictly an administrative function and viewed
as a "necessary evil" unable to provide value-added assistance to the businesses.
The new Sr. VP of HR was also relatively young, from a different country than
CoatCo headquarters location and offered global HR expertise. The organization was
5
becoming ripe for change with new ideas and experiences abounding from top
management but would have to determine how it would cascade a new philosophy to
the business units who ran their businesses very autonomously. A new strategy would
need to be developed and HR would be an important contributor as a business
partner.
The new strategy emphasized creating a platform for growth both organically and
through acquisitions for the prominent businesses and reinforcing the financial
position. Long-term growth and sustainability were vital components. This strategy
would be implemented to build a performance-driven culture. It included pursuing an
entrepreneurial spirit within the business but also focusing on individual integrity as
well as social responsibility. Business units that did not perform would risk the
possibility of being divested.
One of the main reasons for change within the organization was driven by the poor
results of the pharmaceutical business units. Despite tough economic and market
conditions, the rest of the company did manage to grow but not the pharmaceutical
units. This group had lost a patent on a best-selling drug and did not have new drugs
in the pipeline. As a consequence, the organization had to make a significant decision
to either reinvest in the unit or divest it. In early 2006, the company announced its
intention to separate from the pharmaceutical group. The company would now focus
on its core business: coatings and chemicals.
6
Another reason for the change was the intense growth opportunities for the company
in the developing markets of Asia. The potential for economic growth was already
becoming a reality in this region. The coatings and chemical groups could become the
largest in the world with this growth opportunity.
Included in the company's strategy was the focus of its people. The organization
issued a new company statement in 2005 with refocused commitments and ambitions
to its people.
The company regards people as its most important resource. We foster leadership, individual accountability, and teamwork.
Our employees are professionals whose entrepreneurial behavior is result-oriented and guided by personal integrity.
They strive for the success of their own units in the interest of the company as a global company. In return, our employees can count on opportunities for individual and professional development in an international working environment. We offer them rewarding and challenging assignments with room for initiative.
It became clear that change was imminent and the human capital element would play
a large role. The CEO made note that what really differentiates companies in the
long-term is not the product or even the service, but the quality of the people.
Therefore, what really matters in making companies strong and competitive is
developing people. With this driving principle at the forefront, the CEO's goal was to
build a talent factory. It would require consistent policy in terms of developing talent
7
that could be innovative and, as a result, provide sustaining success. This was the new
role of HR as a business partner.
There were several external challenges for HR as it analyzed the situation. The
continuing globalization with heterogeneous, geographic profiles became very
evident. The intensity and pace of the competition was fierce. In many areas, the
competition for talent was immense due to a shortage of skilled workers. The
workforce was becoming "mature" with differing generational needs and wants. And,
technology had changed the requirements for managing and communicating with
people.
Internally, the company was made up of small business units with a broad portfolio of
businesses. The company desired to move from a fully independent model to an
entrepreneurial synergy model. It desired to become one company but with
entrepreneurial business units. The workforce had matured with long serving and
stable individuals. Equally vital, limited investment had been made into the people in
the past.
To create a high performing organization, change in many areas would need to occur
including communications, performance management, employee development, and
rewards and recognitions. Each business unit would have to embrace this new
strategy in order to build a talent factory.
8
In an initial move to gain support, the executive compensation program for all
business units was revised for consistency purposes. In the past, bonuses were granted
based upon individual objectives and little focus on company performance. With the
introduction of the new Economic Value-Added (EVA) model, the emphasis turned
to creating value for the organization for long-term growth. In addition, long-term
incentives were added to the package. This was the first time that the company was
looking long-term versus quarter to quarter.
In another move to further advance the road toward a talent factory, an individual
from outside the organization was hired to become the Director of Talent
Management in June, 2005. This individual was not a European but an American,
another sign of change as well as diversity. It signaled that the organization was
changing its focus and approach to its most valuable asset, its people, while
recognizing the necessary diversity of a global company.
As a part of this talent management function, a world-wide performance management
system was implemented in 2006 for the first time in the company's history. It was
applicable to all business units with a consistent form of evaluation structures,
focused on six company competencies:
Results orientation
Customer focus
Quality commitment
9
Trustworthiness
Teamwork
Innovation
These core competencies were derived from the organizational strategic building
blocks of entrepreneurial spirit, social responsibility and personal integrity. The new
process would drive the culture of the company to focus on results, development and
differentiation. It was considered a critical and timely opportunity to initiate and
improve the focus on the people.
However, the most sweeping change from the performance management system was
the drive for performance differentiation through the executive compensation
program. Both the short-term and long-term incentive plans were directly tied to the
individual results of the performance appraisal. It was impossible to receive one
hundred percent of the bonus without exceeding expectations and goals. To simply
meet the basic requirements of a job would no longer be acceptable. The drive for
performance was on.
In May of 2006 a world-wide employee survey was conducted. This was the first time
all business unit employees participated in an employee survey. The results would
serve as a benchmark for the global organization, country organizations and the US
country service unit (CSU). Surveys have broad appeal and carry a sense of
10
legitimacy as they are viewed by many people as being democratic, fair, and typically
a confidential means of assessing a wide range of opinions with an easy method
(Church & Waclawski, 1998). In the words of the CEO, the survey was conducted
because, "We want to create a true 'talent factory' at CoatCo and to strengthen our
focus on our people, their capabilities and ongoing development." The survey was
utilized as a tool to provide feedback to business units and departments on how it
feels to work at CoatCo; and the survey would allow improvement action plans to be
put in place.
A basic belief at CoatCo was that business results and customer satisfaction are
stronger when people feel motivated, energized and engaged. Church and Waclawski
(1998) purport that through the use of surveys and data analysis, one can identify
what types of behaviors or working conditions need to be changed or reinforced that
will lead to employees feeling more satisfied. In addition, they emphasize that a
company can use initial survey data to establish a baseline measure against which
future survey results can be tracked.
Overall on a global basis, the most favorably rated items were: customer focus,
quality commitment, and teamwork. The most unfavorably rated areas that needed
attention included developing others, managing performance, and stimulating an open
climate. While employee engagement rated in the middle, it was clearly linked to
these factors. These results came as no surprise to the company or the employees. If
11
the company was going to become a high performing organization, it would have to
further develop and implement a talent management strategy. The company would
need to focus alignment on its most valuable asset with the strategic intent of
becoming a high performing coatings/chemical organization. "Strengthening the
business by engaging our people" became the company motto.
Research Proposal
In order to develop the talent within the individual business units, organizational
change has to occur as part of the human resources strategic plan. Organization
development tools and interventions must be incorporated into the business unit
model. However, in a highly decentralized company, this can be difficult. Each
business unit may have different methods of accomplishing this feat.
This research will examine one particular country service unit in the US referred to as
CSU. The service unit is responsible for the functional areas of the corporation such
as legal, tax, human resources, finance, treasury, procurement, and IT functions
within the US. The human resources function of this service unit (SU) strives to be a
business partner with the business units located in the US that provide programs and
processes to enable the business unit to attract, motivate, deploy and retain talent to
support the business objectives. The main focus is a consultative role to provide the
expert HR resources business units that will typically not employ themselves. These
areas of expertise include benefits, compensation, expatriate administration, retiree
administration, organization development and acquisition and divestiture activity. The
12
business unit is then better able to focus on its core business objectives. The core HR
objectives of the CSU are,
1. Deliver services in a customer-focused environment,
2. Create an entrepreneurial organization which embraces the shared values of
working together and understanding the business unit (BU) objectives,
3. Improve continuously through the constant review of work streams and provide
continuing education.
As a service unit, it both struggles with its identity and providing development and
growth for its own employees. So much time and effort is put into servicing the
business units that it often ignores its own needs that are keys to providing sustainable
growth and opportunities for the future to the entire organization. This situation
yielded a new opportunity to focus on investing in its own human capital in order to
improve performance and engagement within the service unit. Here was the pristine
time to create a talent management strategy designed to enhance the skills and
knowledge of the employees of the organization.
Based upon the initial employee survey in 2006, the key areas identified with the
lowest scores for the CSU were survey utilization, developing others and managing
performance. These same areas were identified for the organization on a global basis
as well as within the US.
13
The management of the service unit put together goals for improving its talent
management and engagement strategy based upon the benchmark global data.
1) Managing the performance of the employees was rated extremely low. The rewards and recognition of the employees were seen as a detriment instead of as an award. A review of the rewards and recognition program would need to be conducted as well as examining the work-life balance programs.
Specific areas to address included: a) merit increases b) recognition programs c) flexibility
2) Development of employees was also rated low. The existing programs needed to be reviewed and analyzed and new recommendations needed to be made. In addition, there was a corporate initiative to review development needs within the entire organization. The CSU would participate on the global committee and the results would be incorporated into the CSU strategy as well.
Specific areas to address included: a) Education and seminar opportunities b) Cross-training c) Development dialog program
3) Communication was a strong concern from the survey. The employees perceived a weak link in communications. Vehicles for a higher level of communication would need to be explored as well as determining the most effective types of communications.
These goals began to form the building blocks of a talent management strategy that
would focus on the organization's most value asset; it's people.
This field research exploration will look to answer the following questions:
• What is talent management? How is it defined?
14
• What is employee engagement and how can it be defined for both practitioner and
academic purposes?
• How does a talent management strategy affect employee engagement?
• Can organizations increase employee engagement through a talent management
strategy that yields better organizational effectiveness and alignment with
strategy?
• How should HR/OD support a talent management strategy?
The study of this particular CSU will illustrate how human resources and organization
development have partnered to contribute to the overall company strategy of holding
the most valuable asset, the people, as the differentiator of a successful, effective, and
sustainable organization. It will highlight the attributes that allow for a change in
emphasis on the employees of an organization through talent management and how
their engagement can make a difference toward achieving an organization's overall
goals and strategy.
Chapter 2 outlines the relevant literature research related to talent management,
engagement and organizational change. The research approach and methods are
covered in Chapter 3. A triangulation of data approach is outlined that includes
utilizing both quantitative and qualitative methods. Chapter 4 discusses the results
and findings of the quantitative surveys and the qualitative interviews. It also outlines
the interventions and their results in relationship to the quantitative and qualitative
15
data. Chapter 5 discusses the implications of the findings as they relate to theory and
the scholar-practitioner use in talent management strategy and engagement. Chapter 6
summarizes the conclusions and reviews the implications of the study for scholars
and practitioners. It concludes with a discussion of potential future research.
Chapter 2: Literature Review
Talent Management
The term talent management first emerged in the late 1990s and was popularized
when a study completed by researchers within McKinsey and Company revealed that
it was not "best" practices that distinguished high performing companies but it was a
pervasive talent management mindset (Michaels, Handfield-Jones, & Axelrod, 2001).
The competitive advantage for organizations comes from having superior talent and
managing it appropriately throughout the organization. It is the responsibility and job
of all managers. Michaels, Handfield-Jones and Axelrod (2001) found that on average
companies that did a better job of attracting, developing and retaining talented
employees earned a 22 percentage point higher return to shareholders. But is talent
management just a new term for an old concept?
There is nothing new about companies wanting to secure the best talent
("Everybody's doing it," 2006). The East India Company, founded in 1600, used
competitive examinations to recruit alpha minds. GE did it with its "people
development." But something is new in the air. Managing talent has become more
important to a much wider range of companies than it used it be. Talent management
practices have developed and adapted through the years in response to many changes
in the workplace, from the industrial revolution to globalization to outsourcing.
16
17
Talent management has taken different forms over the years and does not only look at
finding the best talent but also at developing the individual. Schein (1978) examined
development of the individual throughout the career cycle and developed the concept
of career anchors. Career anchors evolve over time in one's personal and
occupational experiences. It is defined as the area of self concept that a person would
not give up if forced to make a choice (Schein, 1978). They organize and constrain
career decisions. A career anchor has three components:
1. self-perceived talents and abilities,
2. self-perceived motives and,
3. self-perceived attitudes and values.
The concept emphasizes the interaction between abilities, motives and values into a
person's "self concept". It is the "real self.
Schein (1978) originally identified five career anchors:
1. technical/functional competence,
2. general managerial competence,
3. autonomy/independence,
4. security/stability,
5. entrepreneurial creativity.
In the 1980s, Schein (1996) identified three additional anchors:
18
1. service/dedication to a cause,
2. pure challenge,
3. lifestyle.
It was very evident in the 1970s where individuals stood with respect to their career
anchors. However, in the 1980s, Schein (1996) found that people had to adjust to the
turbulent environment that existed within organizations and the three additional
anchors emerged. He found that people had to become more self-reliant with rapid
technological and economical changes. People do want to increasingly provide a
contribution to the greater good and general managerial skills were becoming more of
a standard process for most jobs.
In order to attract talent, organizations need to take these factors into account. In
addition, these same factors will play a role in the development of individuals within
the organization. As firms provide development opportunities, individuals will need
to assess their own career anchors to determine how to best increase productivity and
engagement. However, not all firms provide development. Schein (1996) questions
whether, "individual career occupants have to plan and budget for their own learning,
or will private and/or public organizations take on some of this burden because it will
ultimately be to their advantage as organizations?" (p. 83). Unfortunately, ten years
later, this question still has not been answered. Most organizations are still trying to
19
figure out what talent management is and how best to optimize it. There are no
standard development programs.
Schein (1996) does advocate greater employee participation especially with his
research on career anchors, but also imposes on organizations a need to do better
work design and development of roles through open-systems planning. He adds that
employee development will become a process rather than an initial selection based on
an individual's history. Schein (1996) predicted that organizational culture and
climate will be a key factor to changing this direction and human resource strategy
will become decentralized into organizations in order to become integrated with the
overall corporate activity. He acknowledged that talent can be developed in the
individual but that the culture or climate must also be appropriate for this to occur.
This laid the foundation for further development and alignment of talent management
strategy.
Managing talent has become more important to a wider range of companies than it
used to be. The future of talent management may be about embracing and leveraging
connectedness (Frank & Taylor, 2004). Corporations now appear ready to embrace
this concept (Oakes, 2006). In fact, it has become a strategic imperative for many
organizations (Ashton & Morton, 2005). Talent management is actually a part of the
overall strategy for companies. It is taking precedent in terms of how organizations
20
can compete with the best resources available for the highest organizational
effectiveness.
There are numerous articles and literature primarily in the popular and practitioner
press directed towards the field of talent management (Lewis & Heckman, 2006). But
there is a lack of clarity regarding the definition, scope and overall goals of talent
management; it is rarely addressed in the academic journals (Lewis & Heckman,
2006). This is the gap to bridge the practitioner and academic worlds. Table 1
provides a summary of the various streams of thought with respect to talent
management as well as provides a proposed holistic definition of talent management
based on the research.
Table 1. Definitions of Talent Management
Human Resources = - Talent management is a collection of Talent Management typical HR department practices (recruiting,
selection, development, career/succession management) - Replaces the term HR with Talent Management
Talent Pool Concept - Talent management is a set of processes designed to ensure an adequate flow of employees into jobs throughout the organization
- Related to human resource planning - Focus is on internal "workforce/manpower" planning; succession planning
Right people at the right time in the right job
Table 1 continues
(Byham,2001; Heinen & O'Neill, 2004; Olsen, 2000)
(Cheloha & Swain, 2005; Jackson & Schuler, 1990; Kesler, 2002)
21
Generic Talent Management
- Talent management does not just focus on specific positions or boundaries: 1) manage talent according to performance 2) manage talent as an undifferentiated good and emerges from both humanistic and demographic perceptions - It is critical to manage everyone to high performance because demographics and business trends make talent more critical - Cooperation and communication of managers at all levels - Align the talent and developmental needs of organizations and their leaders to achieve business results through succession planning and management.
(Buckingham & Vosburgb.,2001; McCauley & Wakefield, 2006; Redford, 2005; Rothwell & Poduch, 2004)
Holistic Talent Management Concept
- Talent management is a concept and a strategy that: 1) Integrates human resources and systems
a) cuts across all departments and levels b) cooperation of all employees and managers from Board ofMgmt to the lowest level of employees 2) Facilitative in nature (OD-like) 3) Aligns talent with business strategy (not an HR initiative) 4) Proactive in terms of future growth and sustainability 5) Develops improved processes for developing and managing talent 6) Connectedness in culture among all employees/managers
The first area of consideration is that talent management is a collection of typical
human resources department practices, functions, activities or specialist areas such as
recruiting, selection, development and career and succession building (Byham, 2001;
22
Heinen & O'Neill, 2004; Olsen, 2000). It is managing the HR function but doing it
faster or across the entire organization. The term HR is essentially replaced by Talent
Management (Conn, Khurana, & Reeves, 2005; Conger & Fulmer, 2003; Garger,
1999).
A second stream defines talent management in terms of talent pools. This track is
closely related to succession planning or human resource planning as it focuses on
internal talent rather than external (Cheloha & Swain, 2005). Talent management is
an architecture where a set of processes are designed to ensure an adequate flow of
employees into jobs throughout the organization (Jackson & Schuler, 1990).
Essentially, it is having the right people at the right time in the right job (Kesler,
2002). It is not unusual for many organizations to consider talent management as the
recruitment process where technology can automate the procedures. If the definition
is more than recruitment, it takes the employee lifecycle into consideration and
includes not only attracting talent but also aligning and maintaining performance
while developing talent ("A framework for talent management," 2007).
Buckingham and Vosburgh (2001) define talent management in terms of managing
talent according to performance and as an undifferentiated good that emerges from
both humanistic and demographic perceptions. This is "generic" talent management.
It does not focus on just specific positions or boundaries. A critical component is to
manage everyone to high performance which requires cooperation and
23
communication of managers at all levels (McCauley & Wakefield, 2006; Redford,
2005). It is the implementation of integrated systems designed to increase workplace
productivity by developing improved processes for attracting, developing, retaining
and utilizing people to meet current and future business needs ("SHRM HR
Glossary,"). Rothwell and Poduch (2004) further develop the notion that talent
management includes succession planning which is a systematic, long term approach
to meeting present and future talent needs in order to meet business objectives but
also go a step further. It is not just about putting the right people in the right place at
the right time but embodies any effort designed to ensure the continued effective
performance of an organization or department by focusing on the development,
replacement and strategic application of key people over time (Rothwell, 2000).
Rothwell and Wellins (2004) purport utilizing competency models to help plan for
future talent requirements, identify work expectations, provide a common language
for feedback discussion regarding performance and recruit and select new talent.
These all work in concert to develop individuals and plan for the future needs of an
organization.
Talent management is much more than simply recruiting, succession planning,
training and putting people in the right jobs at the right time. While these dimensions
are all included in talent management, there are other important components to
consider as well which include communication, development of the individuals, and
the culture or climate of an organization. It is a strategic imperative (Ashton &
24
Morton, 2005). When talent management becomes a core competence, it significantly
improves strategy execution and operational excellence. It is a holistic approach to
both HR/OD and business planning. It improves the performance and the potential of
people who can impact the organization. Ashton and Morton (2005) conclude since
there is no single, consistent, concise definition, talent management must be fluid so
that as the business drivers change so does the talent management strategy. It
involves the cooperation and communication of managers at all levels. Talent
management must be more strategic, connected and broad-based than ever before in
order to drive performance, deal with an increasingly rapid pace of change, and create
sustainable success which aligns with the business strategy (McCauley & Wakefield,
2006).
Based on the review of these various interpretations, it is proposed that the concept of
talent management may need to take on a more holistic approach. Talent management
is defined by combining many of the attributes into a "whole" model viewed in terms
of a concept and strategy that:
1. Integrates human resources and systems across all departments and levels,
2. Involves the cooperation of all levels of managers from the Board of Management
to the first line supervisors,
3. Facilitates by nature,
4. Aligns talent with the business strategy,
5. Proactive in terms of future growth and sustainability,
25
6. Develops improved processes for developing and managing talent,
7. Provides connectedness in culture among all employees and managers.
Talent management is not a HR/OD initiative but is integrated within organizational
strategy. It provides the framework for driving the strategy throughout the company
and at all levels. An organization cannot simply implement one facet of talent
management but must combine them all together in order to build a complete concept
and strategy. By combining all talent management contexts together, talent
management enables an organization to "grow" the future from a holistic perspective.
In order to develop a successful talent management strategy, employees need to feel
"connected" or engaged to their job and/or organization. Effective talent management
policies and practices that demonstrate commitment to human capital result in more
engaged employees and lower turnover (Driving Performance and Retention Through
Employee Engagement, 2004). Employee engagement can make or break a bottom
line (Lockwood, 2006). If this is in fact true, a talent management strategy cannot be
sustained without employee engagement.
Employee Engagement
Similar to talent management, engagement has multiple definitions in both the
practitioner and academic spheres. The practitioner models of engagement are often
defined by the consultants that design employee engagement surveys. The Gallup
Management consultants ("Gallup study: Engaged employees inspire company
26
innovation," 2006) express engagement as employees who work with passion and feel
a profound connection to their company. They drive innovation and move the
organization forward. Watson Wyatt views engagement as a combination of
commitment and line of site (Debunking the Myths of Employee Engagement, 2006).
Committed employees are proud to work for their companies and motivated to help
drive success. Line of sight is where employees understand the organization's
business goals, the steps that must be taken to achieve those goals and know how they
can contribute to achieving the goals. Similarly, Right Management (Measuring True
Employee Engagement, 2006) defines engagement as employees committed to the
success of the business strategy. This is interpreted through job satisfaction,
commitment, pride and advocacy. According to Blessing White (Employee
Engagement Report 2006,2006), employee engagement represents an alignment of
maximum job satisfaction with maximum job contribution. Employees are enthused
and use their talents to make a difference in their employer's quest for sustainable
business success. And, Towers Perrin (Global Workforce Study, 2005) views it as
employees' willingness and ability to help their companies succeed by freely and
consistently delivering discretionary effort on the job. In general, most definitions
include employee commitment, a connection to the job and organization and an
understanding of the organization's goals and strategies. Engaged employees exhibit
a willingness to make an extra effort for the success of the company.
27
From an academic perspective, employee engagement has multiple definitions as
well. Kahn (1990) defines personal engagement as the "harnessing of organization
members' selves to their work roles; in engagement, people employ and express
themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally during role performances" (p.
694). They promote connections to work and to others in an engaged environment.
He measures these based on four dimensions of psychological presence: a)
attentiveness, b) connection, c) integration and, d) focus. Rothbard (2001) defines
engagement similarly to Kahn but adds two motivational dimensions which are
attention (amount of time one spends thinking about a role) and absorption (being
engrossed in a role and refers to the intensity of one's focus on a role).
Correspondingly, Salanova, Agut and Peiro (2005) also purport a motivational
construct. A positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind is characterized by vigor,
dedication and absorption. May, Gilson and Harter (2004) conclude that engagement
is concerned with how the individual employs his/her self during the performance of
his/her job. It entails the active use of emotions and behaviors as well as cognitions.
Maslach, Schaufeli, and Leiter (2001) characterize engagement as the opposite of
burnout and defined by involvement, efficacy and energy.
The antithesis of engaged is disengaged which also has connection to the term
"burnout." If an employee is not engaged, he/she could be burned out or disengaged.
Burnout is a syndrome of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and reduced sense
of accomplishment (Leiter & Maslach, 1988). It is the feeling of being emotionally
28
overextended and drained by one's contact with other people. Maslach, Schaufeli and
Leiter (2001) further define six antecedents of burnout: workload, control, reward,
community, fairness and values. Disengagement is in a similar context. Kahn (1990)
notes that when individuals are disengaged, people withdraw physically, cognitively
or emotionally. Individuals lack connections with others. Gallup ("Gallup study:
Engaged Employees Inspire Company Innovation," 2006) classifies disengaged
employees as "not-engaged" and "actively disengaged." Not-engaged employees are
essentially "checked out." They are putting their time in towards their work but with
no energy or passion. Actively disengaged employees are not just unhappy at work;
they're busy acting out their unhappiness. Thus, burnout can be viewed as the
opposite of engagement. It is the erosion of employee engagement (Maslach & Leiter,
1997). The ability to identify when people are disengaged can play a role in defining
how employees can be engaged. It helps to determine the factors that are important
order to identify areas to improve engagement.
Overall, in the academic literature, employee engagement has been consistently
defined as a distinct and unique construct that consists of cognitive, emotional, and
behavioral components that are associated with individual role performance. Saks
(2006) emphasizes that it is different from organizational commitment in that
engagement is not an attitude; it is the degree to which an individual is attentive and
absorbed in the performance of his/her roles. It also differs from job involvement in
that engagement has to do with how individuals employ themselves in the
29
performance of their job; it is not the result of a cognitive judgment about the need
satisfying abilities of the job. Engagement involves the active use of emotions and
behaviors in addition to cognitions. The practitioner definitions tend to overlap into
other constructs such as job involvement and commitment and the academic
definition is more precise, but in general, they both attempt to measure the alignment
and motivation of an employee's effort toward his/her job and the goals of an
organization.
Table 2 summarizes these various definitions and brings forth a proposal for a
combined academic and practitioner definition of employee engagement.
30
Table 2. Definitions of Employee Engagement
Practitioner - Engaged employees work with passion and feel a profound connection to their company
- Engagement is a combination of commitment and line of sight. - Employee engagement represents an alignment of maximum job satisfaction with maximum job contribution.
- Engagement means each individual understands and is committed to the success of the business strategy/interpreted through job satisfaction, commitment, pride and advocacy.
- Employees' willingness and ability to help their companies succeed by freely and consistently delivering discretionary effort on the job.
Academic - Harnessing of organization members' selves to their work roles; in engagement, people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally; promote connections to work and others (attentiveness, connection integration, focus)
- Attention and absorptions
- Involvement
- A positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, absorption
Combined academic and practitioner approach:
- Job is challenging & meaningful
- Have resources to do job
- Trust in management
- Perceived support from organization
- Perceived support from supervisor
- Rewarded and recognized
- Committed to organization
- Safe to act
(Debunking the Myths of Employee Engagement, 2006; Employee Engagement Report 2006,2006; "Gallup study: Engaged employees inspire company innovation," 2006; Global Workforce Study, 2005; Measuring True Employee Engagement, 2006)
(Kahn, 1990; Maslach et al., 2001; D.R. May et al., 2004; Rothbard, 2001;Salanovaetal., 2005)
31
It is proposed that employee engagement should be defined based on both academic
and practitioner characteristics and attributes. There are cognitive, emotional and
behavioral aspects defined by job satisfaction and commitment. The employee is
connected to the job and able to independently and freely perform. It is the notion that
a job is challenging and meaningful. Individuals have the appropriate resources for
their job and perceive adequate, if not positive, support from their supervisor as well
as from the organization. This invites employees to be committed to their job and
company. They feel that they are appropriately rewarded and recognized for their
performance. Employees have trust in management and feel the organizational culture
promotes a positive environment in which to perform. These behaviors, emotions and
cognitions all play a part in the level of engagement for employees that ultimately
affect organizational effectiveness.
Talent Management and Its Relationship to Employee Engagement
Talent management practices and policies that demonstrate commitment to human
resources result in more engaged employees and lower turnover (Driving
Performance and Retention Through Employee Engagement, 2004). Consequently,
employee engagement has a substantial influence on employee productivity and talent
retention. Employee engagement and talent management combined can make or
break the bottom line (Lockwood, 2006). According to a study completed by the
Corporate Leadership Council (Driving Performance and Retention Through
Employee Engagement, 2004), employees who are committed perform 20% better
32
and are 87% less likely to resign. In addition, they found a workforce that is engaged
begins with the quality, depth and authenticity of communication by both HR and
senior management to employees. The role of the manager is a key component, if not
one of the most important. It is the manager who enables employee commitment to
the job and organization.
The process of building employee engagement is ongoing. Effective employee
engagement fosters an environment of stimulation, development and learning,
support, contribution and recognition (Lockwood, 2006). Lockwood (2006)
concludes that it is the work experience and ultimately, the organizational culture that
determine employee engagement and retention of talent. To sustain high-level
business results in a global economy, organizations have to reinvent their approaches
to talent management. Effective talent management requires strong participatory
leadership, organizational buy-in and employee engagement (Lockwood, 2006).
Companies that master talent management will be well positioned for long-term
growth in workforce performance for the future.
The demands to manage talent are placing new emphasis on strategic requirements of
the HR/OD function. This paradigm shift requires a new level of participation at the
executive level. As Rothwell and Poduch (2004) note, most executives think of talent
planning as "executive placement planning—that this, planning for senior-level
backups" (p. 45). Rothwell (2002) further explains that talent planning is proactive
33
and attempts to ensure the continuity of leadership by developing internal talent, and
needs to be considered at the same time executives make business decisions. But it
goes beyond looking at internal needs to exploring the future goals that may be
outside of the organization and incorporates wider dimensions of strategy planning.
The culture and communications of an organization must also be integrated. The
talent management concept is holistic and encompasses translating corporate goals
into workforce needs, linking people to profit and effectively managing talent to
improving business performance (Farley, 2005). The executive level management
will need to redefine how human capital is incorporated into the overall
organizational strategy. Improved outcomes will only come to those organizations
that learn to master talent management functions.
How Can a Talent Management Strategy Drive Employee Engagement and Influence Organizational Strategy?
In order to sustain business results in a global economy, organizations will have to
rethink their approaches to talent management and how it affects employee
engagement. Many managers understand or even recognize that skilled and motivated
people are key to the operations of any company that wishes to flourish (Barlett &
Ghoshal, 2002). Yet, after a decade of reengineering and decentralizing, employees
are more exhausted than empowered and more cynical than positive. Only marginal
attention has been focused on the issues of employee capability and motivation.
According to Bartlett and Ghoshal (2002), "Somewhere between theory and practice,
precious human capital is being misused, wasted or lost" (p. 34).
34
As change continuously occurs in sustaining companies, the talent management
strategy is an integral component of driving continuous transition in the company
(Grossman, 2007). As complexity and change drive organizations, managing talent
will need to move from an art to a science. Long gone is the day of the "gut instinct"
management style (Davis & Stephenson, 2006). Today's business leaders are looking
for decision-making techniques to help run their organizations and to engage the
population. According to Davis and Stephenson (2006), scientific management will
become a necessary tool to not only maintain a competitive edge but simply to stay in
the game. It should come as no secret that people are the ultimate source of sustained
competitive advantage since traditional sources related to markets, financial capital
and scale economies have been weakened by globalization (Ulrich & Lake, 1991).
Pfeffer (1994) also makes the case that if firms are going to compete in today's
economy, they need to build employees who possess the right skills and capabilities.
The best talent management decisions are made when leaders have a wealth of data
on talent in the organization (Farley, 2005). To maintain and build talent requires that
the employees be engaged.
The talent management mindset must be altered. Many senior level managers believe
that capital is the critical strategic resource to be managed. However, it is the human
capital that should be viewed as the strategic resource. There are several different
theories that drive talent management strategy toward engagement and ultimately,
improved organizational effectiveness.
35
Resource-based Theory With traditional strategies focusing on profit opportunities in relation to the external
environment, the resource-based view is concerned with the pool of resources and
capabilities as the primary determinants of strategy and performance (Grant, 2005).
Barney (1991) advocates that the role of resources in producing firm-wide results
should be taken into consideration. Sustained competitive advantage comes from
developing resources that are rare and difficult to imitate. Barney includes human
capital in his definition of resources but it must be rare and imitable. Managerial
resources are not necessarily rare unless there is a specific attribute that is not found
in any other firm (Barney, 1991).
The resource-based view emphasizes that the uniqueness of each company is key to
profitability and that exploiting these differences will maintain and sustain
competitiveness. This also includes human capital. Deregulation in many industries
and globalization have played major roles in this change from a pure profitability
view to deploying resources and capabilities. Organizations must have capabilities to
undertake a particular productive role. Hamel and Prahalad (1994) coined the term
core competencies to distinguish those capabilities fundamental to a firm's
performance and strategy. They define core competencies as those that make a
disproportionate contribution to ultimate customer value and provide a basis for
entering new markets. This, too, includes the human capital factor. Bartlett and
Ghoshal (2002) purport that by definition, competency-based strategies are dependent
36
on people. People are the key strategic resource and as more and more companies
come to this conclusion, competition for scarce human resources will heat up.
Competency modeling has become a preferred model for identifying a set of skills,
knowledge and values that will align human resources with the organization's
strategy (Grant, 2005). This is an essential factor or else the organization's overall
strategy cannot be implemented and carried forward.
Lado and Wilson (1994) assert that, "The resource-based view suggests that human
resource systems can contribute to sustained competitive advantage through
facilitating the developing of competencies that are firm specific, produce complex
social relationships, are embedded in a firm's history and culture, and generate tacit
organizational knowledge" (p. 699). Companies such as Marriott, Borg-Warner and
Merck have attributed their competitive advantage to their unique methods for
managing human resources. A human resource (HR) system is defined as a set of
distinct but interrelated activities, functions and processes that are directed at
attracting, developing, and maintaining (or disposing of) a firm's human resources. It
is possible that HR systems could destroy or prevent competencies to be fully
developed, thus it is essential to integrate the HR/OD processes into the strategy. OD
contributes by developing the methodology for change to ensure the proper human
resources are available at the right time. In order to achieve sustainable competitive
advantage, continuous monitoring by the firm of competency patterns is vital as
patterns continue to change over time (Lado & Wilson, 1994).
37
Organizational culture is another piece of the resource-based view. Simply hiring
individual contributors is typically not acceptable in an organization that has a
strategy of integration or requires teamwork. If employees are not engaged, the
culture cannot be collaborative. Collaboration is a key component of a successful
strategy and often it relates to an intangible asset, which is culture. Schein (1990)
eloquently defines culture as
(a) a pattern of basic assumptions, (b) invented, discovered, or developed by a given group, (c) as it learns to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal integration, (d) that has worked well enough to be considered valid and, therefore (e) is to be taught to new members as the (f) correct way to perceive, think and fall in relation to those problems, (p. I l l )
This relates directly to resource-based strategy for what a group learns over a period
of time as it solves its problems of survival in an external environment; and its
problems of internal integration as it becomes a complex process to integrate and
account for in totality. Culture can become ingrained and difficult to change but this
is the function of HR/OD to enable the organization to move forward. The change
agent is HR/OD. Many organizational programs fail because culture forces are
ignored (Schein, 1990).
Barney (1986) confirms that a firm's culture does generate sustained competitive
advantages if it has the required attributes. The required attributes include: (a) the
culture must be valuable, (b) it must be rare, and (c) it must be imperfectly imitable.
The firm must be able to do things that enable it to add economic value while
38
maintaining engagement and it must have a distinct culture that enables it to
differentiate itself from competitors. As with general products, the culture cannot be
imitable if it is going to be sustainable. This research suggests that if firms can
modify their cultures to improve not only financial results but also increase
engagement and still maintain a culture that is imperfectly imitable, it will sustain
superior performance. Here is where HR/OD can play a pivotal role in developing
this type of sustainable culture. HR/OD must undertake the objective to help
management develop an engaging, motivating and bonding culture necessary to
attract and keep talented employees (Barlett & Ghoshal, 2002). Human resource
practices or processes are developed to manage the skills and abilities of talent in
order to make them more difficult to duplicate for competitors (Lewis & Heckman,
2006).
Integrated Strategic Change Theory
The Integrated Strategic Change (ISC) model encompasses a process that involves
learning and adapting over time to ensure long-term competitiveness to business
changes (Worley et al., 1996). This model includes not only formulating strategy but
also implementing and executing the strategy. Most importantly from an HR/OD
perspective, it focuses on organizational capabilities, human resources and
organizational changes required to implement strategies. It provides for active
participation by the members of an organization to be involved to create higher levels
of shared ownership and commitment and is a continuous process. The essential
factor is the alignment of the firm's structure and processes to support its strategy.
39
In this model, formulating strategy and gaining commitment and support for that
strategy, as well as planning and implementing the execution is all one integrated
process (Worley et al., 1996). They are not separate independent activities. HR/OD
works in concert with the rest of the organization to create strategy and provide the
support processes to meet and sustain the goals. The other departments in the
company are embracing and contributing through the processes and steps supported
by HR/OD. This is vital with a talent management strategy.
In the initial step, the organization reviews its readiness for change. Often, the
organization's employees are not ready for change and an HR/OD communication
and intervention must occur. This first stage also includes reviewing the
organization's values and assumptions as well as performance. HR/OD supports this
process through culture as well as activities that are incorporated into the daily
routines of the various departments by supervisors and employees. The HR/OD
system that includes the line management is responsible for selecting, developing and
rewarding managers and employees. If this initiative is not in alignment with the
overall strategy, the process will fail.
In the ISC model, strategy making is also a vital step. The firm's strategic vision is
created. The vision should be developed with participation of the organization
members so they may "buy in" or engage with the vision. The process must involve
employee participation, without it dismal failure will ensue (Worley et al., 1996). To
40
gain commitment and trust, the employees must have a say in the direction. Secondly,
they will then perceive the appropriate support from the organization and feel they
have developed the right environment in which to thrive. Finally, with the proper
rewards and recognitions, the employees will feel motivated and be engaged to both
their job and the organization.
Built-To-Change Theory Similar to the resource-based theory, human capital is critical for a competitive
advantage in built-to-change organizations. There is a recognition that market value
rests with human capital. Research by Huselid (1995) has shown that the impact of a
firm's human capital management practices, such as training programs, efforts to
create a good place to work and reward systems do produce superior results. Other
research suggests that one of the key factors is management of talent (Lawler&
Worley, 2006). Competitive advantage now rests in a company's people and its
ability to organize its human capital rather than compete on the basis of tangible
resources. This is a critical component of the built-to-change theory.
The built-to-change model developed by Lawler and Worley (2006) is a continuous
change and adaptive method that consists of environmental scenarios and three
primary organizational processes—strategizing, creating value and designing—which
all revolve around the organization's identity. The strategizing is a process for
enabling a possible scenario for the future through constant change processes.
Organizational capabilities must be created so that change is the key to success. This
41
can be accomplished through a partnership of HR/OD with the organization building
the appropriate structure and configuring the appropriate talent management
initiatives and rewards (Lawler & Worley, 2006). Talent management includes
developing individuals to provide the skills as the organization and jobs change. It
may mean hiring individuals who already have the desired skill set but who also are
willing to change along with the business. In other situations, it could mean the
strategy may be to acquire and discard talent as necessary. This travel-light theory,
however, may not build a long-term committed workforce. More typically, it is the
commitment to develop employees that is part of the employment terms.
The built-to-change model advocates managing human capital and making people
responsible for their careers (Lawler & Worley, 2006). An organization needs to keep
the right people, which means utilizing appropriate rewards towards satisfaction.
Lawler and Worley (2006) point out that one of the great challenges in satisfying
employees is achieving alignment between what they value and what the organization
can offer. What might not be readily apparent in this model is that culture influences
this challenge. "All of the activities that revolve around recruitment, selection,
training and socialization, the design of the reward systems, the design and
description of jobs, and broader issues of organization design require an
understanding of how organizational culture influences present functioning" (Schein,
1990, pp. 117-118). In essence, this is the talent management concept that the
HR/OD function can incorporate into the strategy. By measuring the results through
42
attitude surveys and statistics such as turnover figures, the effect can be measured on
performance.
IBM is an example of an organization that that has developed HR systems to help
employees manage their careers and provide managers with tools to assist in
employee recruitment (Lawler & Worley, 2006). By providing tools to employees, it
can retain and develop its human resources for future strategic changes. It is
interesting to note that many mangers believe that job satisfaction is an important
determinant of motivation and performance. Lawler and Worley (2006) advocate that
this is false. Job satisfaction does not cause performance but could influence
organizational performance. If dissatisfied employees become disgruntled employees,
they become disengaged and this could result in activities that deviate from the
intended strategy. Hence, it is desirable to create built-to-change organizations that
can make strategy adjustments and change easily throughout the company.
Talentship
Boudreau and Ramstad (2005) have proposed a "decision science" model called
"Talentship" that enhances decisions about talent resources. Their model allows
organizations to enhance decisions about human capital and it connects human
resources to strategy by examining impact effectiveness and efficiency. "People,
intellectual capital and talent are ever more critical to an organization's strategic
success. This observation is so common today that it almost goes without saying"
(Boudreau & Ramstad, 2005, p. 18). Yet, when top executives are asked if their
43
decisions about the talents of their people are made with the same rigor and strategic
connections as their decisions about money, technology and products, they admit that
their talent decisions are not (Boudreau & Ramstad, 2005). This is where HR/OD can
help shift the paradigm for organizational strategy.
According to Boudreau and Ramstad (1997), fields such as finance have augmented
their service delivery with a "decision science" paradigm that teaches the frameworks
to make good choices. HR/OD, like finance and marketing, helps the organization
operate within a critical market for talent. It needs a new paradigm of decision
science for talent (Boudreau & Ramstad, 2005). Decision science provides a system
to identify and analyze key issues, adapting to the unique information and
characteristics of the specific context. According to Boudreau and Ramstad (2005):
The lessons from marketing and finance tell us that the goal of talent decision science would be "to increase the success of the organization by improving decisions that impact or depend on talent resources." We have coined the term "talentship" to describe the new decision science, and to reflect the notion of stewardship for the resource of employee talents. Talentship is to HR what finance is to accounting and what marketing is to sales, (p. 20)
Talent decision mistakes are not being made by HR/OD professionals but by leaders
who do not have a full understanding of their implications and effects on talent
backgrounds of individual employees. The greatest opportunity to improve talent
decisions is outside the HR/OD profession.
44
HR/OD can control the decisions or equip those outside the profession to better
understand the implications of the decisions they make (Boudreau & Ramstad, 2005).
In order for HR and OD to sit at the table with finance and marketing, they must have
a perspective for offering a unique talent for improving decisions and not just
implementing them. The elements of such a talent decision science model include
impact, effectiveness and efficiency. Often, business leaders and strategists focus
only on business processes and market outcomes while ignoring the human capital
factor. Boudreau and Ramstad's (2005) decision framework provides the means to
participate in strategy discussions which routinely take into account the connection
between talent and strategic success. Their anchor points are impact, effectiveness
and efficiency. Impact relates to sustainable strategic success and the resources and
processes available. Effectiveness correlates to the talent pools, the human capacity
and the corresponding aligned actions. Efficiency links to the policy and practices in
place as well as the investments. Combined together, these all connect toward a
decision-making framework that allows human capital to be evaluated as a valuable
asset within the overall organization strategy.
This change in paradigm of valuing human capital as a top priority allows sustainable
strategic success by implementing this decision science strategy within the
organization's ongoing processes. This is one approach to improving organization
effectiveness by integrating the decision process with on-going systems. It is essential
to determine the effects of a decision before it is made.
45
These theories and models provide an opportunity for organizations to achieve
success through one of their most important resources—the talents of their people.
The challenge is to find and implement the preeminent talent management strategy
that will increase engagement and, ultimately, improve organization performance
through alignment with organization strategy.
The Impact and Practicalities of Talent Management Theories If human resources are considered the most important asset, it would seem logical
that there would be a foremost predominant theory for how best to utilize human
capital. Yet, it is very evident that organizations have not placed emphasis on the
talent management of their organizations; technology and costs are driving factors in
what organizations consider key elements to success. However, if companies want
sustainability into the 21st century, they are going to have to change the paradigm and
consider talent into the strategy as a factor.
The resource-based theory accentuates the role of resources. It is the uniqueness of
the resource that provides the competitive advantage (Barney, 1991). However, what
is unique about managers in an organization? Do all managers exhibit the same
managerial skill sets across organizations? It is only through identifying unique skill
sets for the managers that human resources become valuable. Organizations that focus
on development of managers will have an advantage but the focus must be aligned
with company values and competencies. There is no value in organizations that
promote competencies that do not align with company values, as the people will not
46
exhibit the appropriate behaviors in the workplace. This will not align with the
direction of the organizational strategy. It may not be difficult to imitate development
models but they will not be valuable or successful unless they align with the
organizational strategy. This includes policies, procedures and culture. The culture of
an organization must be incorporated into the body of the strategy. Individuals that
have not only the appropriate skill sets but also fit into the culture will succeed.
Organizations will have to take this factor into account when evaluating talent needs.
HR/OD will need to be able to identify the culture as well as the resources that fit into
the organizations' environment. Resource-based theory must include the human
element and not only the products or technology.
In order for an organization to create or change a talent management culture, it is
essential to have the participation of the members of an organization (Worley et al.,
1996). HR/OD strategy is integrated directly into the organizational strategy. It is
embedded into it. If employees are involved in the process of defining the strategy
that includes engaging in the vision and support practices, the process will be a
success. However, so many organizations have functional areas that operate in silos
and do not involve other departments in the overall planning, let alone the employees.
The HR/OD function can play a vital role by facilitating communication and planning
across functional lines and ensuring participation by the employees. Commitment and
trust will only emerge once employees are involved. Integrated strategic change will
47
not become a reality until managing change and human resources becomes a process
rather than an afterthought.
With the reality that the global world operates on a fast-moving continuum, change is
constantly occurring. No organization can rest on a single strategy for long. It must be
constantly adjusted and reviewed. Lawler and Worley (2006) accentuated this
concept in their Built-to-Change theory and emphasized that talent management
initiatives must be a piece of the integrated strategy. But many organizations do not
consider talent in their strategy even if they are constantly adjusting it. The employees
and skill sets that are valued in an organization may change and an organization, as
well as the employees, must be able to prepare and change for the future. Employees
that fit one day in an organization may not fit the next depending on the needs of the
company. Yet organizations do not restructure their talent needs quickly or
appropriately. The role of HR/OD is not one of processing people but facilitating the
role of providing tools and direction for the development of people for the right jobs
at the right time. As strategy changes, so must the support practices and culture that
support it, such as reward programs, recruitment selection and socialization
processes. HR/OD has not incorporated this into their organization roles and
structures because talent has not yet been a driving strategic factor.
The structures to make these decisions have not been developed within organizations.
Consider the decision of a company to implement a new ERP system. So many
48
factors are evaluated in the process such as system requirements, vendor selection,
and cost. The same factors are not considered within a talent decision. When a new
manager is hired or promoted, the same evaluation does not occur. Factors such as
cost, efficiency and impact need to be evaluated and incorporated into the decision.
Regardless of level, it is the employees that will affect the success of an
organization's strategy through commitment and engagement. And, if they are not the
appropriate individuals, the organization's effectiveness will diminish and fail.
As organizations look for the ability to competitively succeed and sustain for the
future, talent management is taking on a new role. A recent survey found that
employers now view "talent management" as the top organizational challenge (2008
Top Five Total Rewards Priorities Survey, 2008). Corporations are now reconsidering
the role of the most valuable asset. It is evident from the emerging theories that the
focus on the alignment of human resources in organizations is vital for success. No
organization is exempt from the rapid global change that occurs continuously. Status
quo is no longer an option for any company. What is successful on one day may not
be the next day. Change and adjustment must occur simultaneously. And, the "asset"
decisions are not only based on technology and equipment but also on people. This
talent management strategy must be integrated and embedded into the overall
organization strategy in order to drive success and sustainability.
49
A Model for Leveraging Engagement Through a Talent Management Strategy
Talent management is a strategy, not an HR initiative. It is not a one-time occurrence
or communication. Talent management supports all strategic and cultural objectives
and embodies emotional commitment by management that is reflected in their actions
and decisions (Ready & Conger, 2007). This allows organizations to develop and
retain key employees to meet evolving business needs. However, talent management
will fail without commitment from top management. The passion must start at the top
and be infused into the culture. Ready and Conger (2007) state that the vitality of a
company's talent management process is a product of three defining characteristics:
commitment, engagement, and accountability. Fostering commitment begins with the
new hire and continues throughout a career. Engagement reflects the degree to which
company leaders show their commitment to talent management. Even down to line
management, engagement is vital to ensure strategy is carried out with specific
policies and practices oriented towards talent implementation. As a result, all
stakeholders, including the employees themselves, are held accountable for making
systems and processes robust.
The model below (Figure 1) proposes a holistic concept of talent management. A
talent management strategy encompasses: open communication, employee
development, rewards and recognitions, managing performance and a culture that
supports these attributes. It is a concept that is supported by top management and
50
embraced by all managers. Through this strategy, employee engagement can be
secured in order to positively affect overall organization strategy as it is embedded
within the culture and company. It is only through this holistic concept, however, that
an impact can be made. If talent management is not part of the organization-strategy,
it is doomed for failure. It is an entire organizational goal and effort.
Organizational Strategy
HR/OD Strategy
Employee Engagement
Have resources to do job
Trust in management
Rewarded and recognized
Committed to organization
Safe to act
Figure 1. Talent Management Model
51
If the basic architecture of a model can be identified and confirmed as core
components of a talent management strategy, organizations can begin to move toward
a more successful performing company.
Organizations must acknowledge that people are their most valuable asset that is a
strategic resource. It is only through maximizing human capital that organizations
will be able to achieve growth and sustain success. Change will continuously occur
but developing a talent management strategy to enhance engagement can result in
improved performance for both the employee and the organization. Ready and
Conger (2007) have summarized the essence of recognizing people as the most
valuable resource:
Leaders have long said that people are their companies' most important assets, but making the most of them has acquired a new urgency. Any company aiming to grow—and, in particular, to grow on the global stage—has little hope of achieving its goals without the ability to put the right people on the ground, and fast. Companies apply focus and drive toward capital, information technology, equipment, and world-class processes, but in the end, it's the people who matter most. (p. 77)
With the proper talent management strategy, human capital can be affirmed as the
number one strategic resource in an organization. This strategy improves employee
engagement that in turn increases organizational success.
This review of the literature has provided contemporary definitions of talent
management and employee engagement. Together, they outline the concepts that are
52
examined within the CSU case. The talent management model will be used as a lens
to interpret the data in this study rather than prove or disprove the model. It provides
the foundation for defining more definitive building blocks that bridge talent
management and employee engagement.
The next chapter outlines the methods utilized to explore and explain the talent
management and engagement challenges faced by the CSU at CoatCo.
Chapter 3: Research Approach and Methods Research Approach
With a holistic talent management approach as an integral component of any
organizational strategy, it is imperative to understand how it affects the engagement
of employees and the corresponding effects on employee and organizational
effectiveness. Continuous change is a basic factor that all companies will have to
contend with in their business strategies (Grossman, 2007; Lawler & Worley, 2006).
However, it is the human capital element that must be considered in the strategy to
determine what factors can have an impact on engaging employees toward higher
levels of performance and commitment, vital to any successful organization.
This dissertation uses an exploratory field study approach to investigate talent
management and how it strategically affects employee engagement. An exploratory
approach allows for investigation and determination of the factors in a talent
management strategy that affect employee engagement. A confirmatory approach
does not allow for the investigation of new factors or values and does not address
how factors are established and utilized. It only tests whether a model is true or not.
An exploratory approach also enables the process of learning from an experience or
action. It is possible to evaluate the impact of interventions or changes and apply the
learning.
53
54
This makes the exploratory study more meaningful in terms of understanding the
changes at different points and making adjustments if necessary. This research is
using a proposed talent management model as a lens to view the field study and
explore what did and did not have impact. It will also examine what drivers
influenced engagement. Specifically, it will determine if key components of a talent
management strategy identified as communication, employee development, managing
performance and rewards as well as providing an open climate directly affect
employee engagement; it will also examine how they influenced engagement.
Employee engagement has been shown to be a contributing factor in organization
effectiveness and strategy and therefore, plays an important role in how an
organization best utilizes its human capital {Employee Engagement Underpins
Business Transformation, 2008).
Central to the exploration is the documentation and analysis of a global company's
implementation of a talent management strategy in the US. With talent management
defined in so many different forms, this study will be able to look at one holistic
approach and determine the key factors and outcomes. This will be useful for other
organizations to study as they embark on talent management strategies. They will be
able to leverage the findings within this organization and apply it to others. It
provides a mechanism to develop future talent management strategies.
55
As described in Chapter 1, the global organization in this field study was making
changes to its core business and had brought in new leadership. With these top-level
changes, the emphasis turned to strengthening the business by engaging the people.
Each business unit and country organization would need to implement a talent
management strategy. Thus, began the initiative to determine how the most valuable
resource of the organization would be best utilized and developed.
The CSU in the US regards its human resources very seriously given that people
providing services run a service unit. There is no physical product that is
manufactured, but instead, a service is provided and only with top talent will best in
class service be supplied. The CSU would begin a journey to implement a talent
management strategy intending to strengthen employee engagement and building
upon organizational strategy to become a high performing organization.
The chapter begins by clarifying the field study methodology to conduct and describe
the exploratory research. Next, it explains the methodological process that includes
the research questions as well as defining the design. Following the design section,
the data collection and analysis process are explained. It closes by discussing the
limitations of this methodology.
56
Field Study
Field studies involve real managers and organizations in contrast with a laboratory
setting where ad hoc groups are created and studied (Scott, 1965). Snow and Thomas
(1994) assert that, "Field research methods can, perhaps more than any other method,
realistically examine strategic processes and outcomes—that is, they provide
mechanisms for observing strategists and organizations in their natural settings" (p.
457). Field studies have taken many forms including single and comparative case
studies, surveys, simulations and natural experiments (Snow & Thomas, 1994). This
research uses a quasi-experimental approach with a comparison of two groups within
a case study of CoatCo. Quasi-experiments are studies that have "treatments,
outcomes and experimental units but do not use random assignment to create the
comparisons from which treatment-caused change is inferred" (Cook & Campbell,
1979, p. 6). Responses of a treatment group and comparison group are measured
before and after a treatment. As an example, Ventkatraman and Zaheer (1990)
conducted a study of an untreated control group design with a pre-test and post-test
design to examine the effects of a technological change on firm performance. Quasi-
experiments can be a powerful method in a field study.
It should be acknowledged that the boundaries between types of organizational
research methods as well as field techniques can be fuzzy (Snow & Thomas, 1994).
Snow and Thomas (1994) cite a variety of research methods that can be used in field
studies: observation, interviews, questionnaire surveys and archival analysis. These
57
methods are also often utilized in case studies. A case study involves the study of an
issue explored through one or more cases in a bounded system (Creswell, 2007). It
can be viewed as a methodology or a comprehensive research strategy. Creswell
(2007) defines case study research succinctly as,
A qualitative approach in which the investigator explores a bounded system (a case) or multiple bounded systems (cases) over time, through a detailed, in depth data collection involving multiple sources of information (e.g. observations, interviews, audiovisual material, and documents and reports), and reports a case description and case-based themes, (p. 73)
Case studies are used across a range of disciplines which explains why there is a
variety of definitions and can also include quantitative and mixed method approaches
(Miles & Huberman, 1994; Stake, 2005; Yin, 2003). Yet, most authors agree that it is
a research strategy that covers the design, data collection and analysis. Case studies
can be embedded in the broader field experiment design.
Yin (2003) points out that in a real-life case study inquiry the boundaries between
phenomenon and context are not always clear. As a result, there will be many more
variables of interest than data points. Therefore, the researcher must draw on multiple
sources of evidence and triangulate to discover converging themes to guide the
analysis process. This is true in this research. There are multiple variables of interest
and triangulation that are used with the data to determine overarching themes.
58
A first step in determining how the field study will be designed is to determine how
many cases to include in the study. It could be a single-case study or a multiple case
study. This field study is a single-case study with two comparison groups. The CSU
group will participate in the interventions and the other US business units will not.
There could be some ethical question about providing interventions for one group and
not the other, but in this situation, the other business units are decentralized and
independently acting on their own. They are not in the "control" of the CSU.
Yin (2003) describes five situations in which using single-case design is appropriate.
The first one is to test the critical case in a well-formulated theory. A second situation
is when the case represents an extreme or unique case. The situation is so rare or
unique, it warrants documentation. Alternately, a third case is one where it is
representative or typical. In this situation, it is assumed that by studying an everyday
occurrence, something will be learned that can be applied to a larger context. A fourth
case is where the case is a revelatory case. Here, the researcher studies something that
was previously inaccessible. A final situation exists where the case is longitudinal.
The researcher can study the same single case at one or more points in time.
This particular study is both representative and unique. The organization which is
being studied is representative of the Chemical and Coatings Industry, yet it has
unique attributes in that it both divested and acquired a large group within a matter of
the two and half years of study. Single case studies exploit the opportunity to explore
59
a significant phenomenon under rare or extreme circumstances (Eisenhardt &
Graebner, 2007). This study exploits the opportunity to investigate how a talent
management strategy is developed and implemented in a service unit when an
organization is changing its business portfolio as well as its emphasis on the
importance of human capital in the business strategy. In addition, this study is
longitudinal in that it took place over a period of two and one half years.
Interestingly, this field case study is also revelatory in nature. A review of the
literature confirms that there is no other documented field or case studies that define,
review and study the outcomes of a talent management strategy and employee
engagement.
The challenge of a single-case study is providing data that is relevant to other
situations. Eisenhardt and Graebner (2007) explain that this can be solved by
presenting a relatively complete rendering of the story within the text. "The story is
intertwined with the theory to demonstrate the close connection between empirical
evidence and emergent theory" (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007, p. 29). This will be the
approach of this field study to show how the story compliments the theory through
combined quantitative and qualitative approaches.
The design of the study must also be created to ensure that the research is valid.
According to Yin (2003), this process includes the research questions, its
propositions, if any; its units of analysis; the logic linking the data to the propositions;
60
and the criteria for interpreting the findings. This process is outlined in this research
by the research questions, design, data collection, data analysis and findings.
Research Questions
This quasi-experimental field study examines how a talent management strategy
impacts employee engagement. The research questions seek to uncover how talent
management is defined in the organization and what attributes positively affect
employee engagement. Specifically, they include:
1. How can organizations increase employee engagement through a talent
management strategy?
2. What are the talent management and employee engagement drivers?
3. How can employee engagement and talent management be defined for both
practitioners and scholars?
4. How should HR/OD support a talent management strategy?
Design
Unit of Analysis
The primary unit of analysis is a US country service unit (CSU) within the CoatCo
organization. This is the group that is being studied. This group provides functional
services to all of the twelve business units within the United States. The CSU results
are being compared to the other business units in the US. The US business units are
not control groups in the sense of one group is provided with a treatment and one is
not in the same identical settings. Cook and Campbell (1979) refer to this as quasi-
experiments with nonequivalent groups that differ from each other in ways other than
61
the presence of a treatment. In this case, the CSU is a service unit and is being
compared to business units. They often have different goals and services. The term
"control" is used in an experimental design sense to eliminate threats to valid
inference (Cook & Campbell, 1979). The assessment of the interventions
implemented for the CSU in comparison to the other US business units helps to
separate the effects and correlates of the treatment. It could be argued that ethically
all groups should receive an intervention, but the traditional notion that an
experimental group should receive the treatment not given to a control group "is a
case of the more general rule that comparison groups are necessary for the internal
validity of scientific research" (Kerlinger & Lee, 2000, p. 487).
The global organization of CoatCo began to obtain opinions through survey data on
employee engagement from employees in May of 2006. The results clearly defined
talent management and development as one of the lowest aspects of the organization
on a world-wide basis. The US service unit would take the initial results of the survey
to begin to build its own talent management strategy.
As part of this process, a talent management model (see Figure 1 in Chapter 2) was
developed to determine if and how it could affect employee engagement. The
management team at CSU supported exploring the model and pursuing interventions
to try to change the culture to focus on employees and enhance engagement.
62
Mixed Methods
To examine the model components in Figure 1 for the field study, a mixed methods
plan design was identified using a triangulation approach. Both quantitative and
qualitative measures were utilized for this study as well as reviewing the longitudinal
intervention effects. The model is used as a theoretical lens to interpret what is
occurring in the field study. It allows a better understanding of what is happening
over a period of time.
Mixed methods are often used to increase the validity and support of the results (Yin,
2003). It provides both explanatory and exploratory views. Rossman and Wilson
(1985) state there are three advantages to using mixed methods: corroboration,
elaboration and initiation. Corroboration is the convergence of findings. Elaboration
provides detail and richness and initiation explores ideas missed without looking at
this view. It is through multiple lenses that research can be created and validated.
From a quantitative perspective, scientific research is defined as a "systematic,
controlled, empirical, amoral, public, and critical investigation of natural phenomena"
(Kerlinger & Lee, 2000, p. 14). After intellectualizing the problem, hypotheses are
formulated and deductive reasoning occurs. A test and experiment follows with either
acceptance or rejection of the hypotheses. These results are used to explain causal
relationships and explanations that can then be generalized to other situations and
settings (Newman & Benz, 1998). It should be noted, however, that in some cases,
63
quantitative data is used for exploratory purposes rather than to only confirm a
hypothesis. As noted by Rossman and Wilson (1985), it is through the use of
corroboration and elaboration that quantitative in conjunction with other sources of
data can provide validated results. The quantitative data does not have to only
confirm or disprove data. This field study is utilizing the quantitative data for
exploratory purposes.
Surveys provide one form of quantitative data analysis. The data can be used to
review correlations and relationships for further explanation or research. However,
surveys have limitations as well. There is no consistent manner to determine how a
participant is interpreting or answering a question based on the current emotional
state or environment and questionnaires do not always have a high response rate
(Snow & Thomas, 1994). In order to enhance the outcomes, qualitative research is
used in concert with the quantitative data to explain the "how" and "why" of the
calculated result.
Qualitative methods provide a way to ask more questions around a subject (Rubin &
Rubin, 2005). They provide multiple sources of data such as interviews, observation,
documents, and reports (Creswell, 2007). It is a good way to develop further
understanding of survey results by investigating the "whys" of responses, and
provides opportunities to create more explicit validation as well as expansion of
initial findings.
64
A third perspective in this triangulation involves the longitudinal aspect of the study
through interventions to determine if change evolved. The service unit would develop
action plans for implementing the talent management strategy and would focus on
areas where improvement was needed as identified through initial survey data. These
included managing performance, developing employees and communication.
The triangulation of the quantitative, qualitative and longitudinal interventions
provides the basis for this research. The quantitative perspective in concert with the
qualitative data is especially important in the research as it is exploratory in nature.
As Yin (2003) has noted, triangulation is a way to discover converging themes to
guide the analysis process. The quantitative data is providing a base to further explore
relationships. The qualitative research can support this initiative in addition to looking
at aspects not fully covered in the quantitative study and the interventions look at
change over a period of time. Triangulation also contributes to the validity of the
quasi-experimental field study results.
Validity
According to Miles and Huberman (1994), validity allows the readers of a study to
make sense of the findings. Construct validity ensures that a measurement actually
measures what the research claims it does. Cook and Campbell (1979) exert that
construct validity is similar to what psychologists worry about with confounding.
This refers to the possibility that the operations which are meant to represent a particular cause or effect construct can be construed in terms of more than one construct, each of which is stated at the same
65
level of reduction. Confounding means that what one investigator interprets as a causal relationship between theoretical constructs labeled A and B, another investigator might interpret as a causal relationship between constructs A and Y or between X and B or even between X and Y. (1979, p. 59)
The concern or threat from a construct validity perspective with the talent
management model may be that it is not talent management that drives engagement
but some other construct. In order to control for this concern, the CSU is being
compared to another group consisting of the US business unit population. This will
assist with validating the results.
Another threat could be that it is simply the extra attention that is being provided to
the participants that is producing change or higher engagement as opposed to a talent
management strategy. This is similar to the "Hawthorn effect." However, this is
being controlled through the longitudinal aspect as well as the qualitative interviews.
Yin (2003) recommends using multiple sources of evidence, establishing a chain of
evidence and getting feedback from key informants on the research study report. This
triangulation process allows for a check on the validity of the constructs of talent
management and employee engagement.
To address validity in this study, several different sources of data were utilized which
included participant observations, interviews, and surveys. These all bring richness
and depth to the case study. In addition, these were tested over time.
66
Internal and External Validity
Internal validity requires confidence in the results and relationships of the concepts.
There should not be significant differences between groups in the study (Kerlinger &
Lee, 2000). The two groups in this case study were not identical, but all employees
were located in the same global organization in the same country. There was
consistency of participants which adds to the internal validity.
The survey instrument used to address the topical areas of importance to management
was consistent throughout the study. The survey was not originally intended to be
used for the purpose of studying talent management strategy and engagement so there
should not be any response bias on the part of the employees. The survey was
originally intended to be used to collect opinions from employees based upon the
current organizational climate and structure.
For internal interviews, participants were randomly selected to be interviewed.
Internal validity also includes the process of checking and questioning results but is
not a strategy for establishing rule-based correspondence between the findings and
the "real world" (Kvale, 1989). In an exploratory research study, internal interviewees
can validate the timeline, source of data and the feedback on the outcomes. It is
important to continually ask questions and collect responses on findings, but there can
be no definitive rules as there is only one case being observed.
67
External validity deals with the issue of whether or not the results are generalizable
beyond the immediate case study. Typically, field studies of one organization are not
generalizable, however individual studies do offer insights that can be applied to
other studies or research. Cook and Campbell (1979) point out that there is a
distinction between generalizing to target populations and across multiple
populations. They assert that in field research, "the practice is more one of
generalizing across haphazard instances where similar-appearing treatments are
implemented" (Cook & Campbell, 1979, p. 73). It is difficult to apply findings to
other settings but external validity can be enhanced by generalizing across a number
of smaller studies within a target area. Importantly, there is also the potential to
transfer ideas or propositions to other research studies. This can be especially
important for the creation of future models or theory. As talent management has not
been thoroughly researched through field studies, this research serves as an initial
study to determine where its findings can be further explored in other studies.
It is through triangulation that construct validity can be explored and the threats can
be minimized. The quasi-experimental field study provides the format and allows for
further research from the findings.
68
Data Collection and Analysis
The data collection for this study involved carrying out interventions as a field study
for the various areas of concentrations in the CSU. It also included conducting and
collecting company engagement surveys for quantitative analysis. To strengthen the
outcomes of the quantitative results and to further build academic theory, qualitative
interviews were conducted (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Yin, 2003), and participant
observations were recorded. These methods along with the longitudinal aspect of the
study allow for a triangular analysis.
Interventions
It is over a period of two and one half years that interventions occurred within the
CSU. These interventions would help define a talent management strategy and
culture. They would assist with the implementation and transition to an employee
focused environment. Often, change does not occur rapidly but rather gradually
(Burke, 2002). It becomes necessary to measure if change is occurring and where
progress is being made. This information from a longitudinal perspective along with
the opportunity to measure impact of actions, allows for an analysis that contributes
to the triangulation.
The interventions were based upon the action plans created from the initial survey
results for the CSU. The initial survey identified developing others, managing
performance and acting on the survey results as the lowest ranked dimensions. The
69
management team of the CSU felt it was important to provide this information for the
impetus toward change.
Survey feedback enables a system to change. It does not automatically bring it about
(Nadler, 1977). It is possible for survey feedback to be ignored, however when
utilized appropriately, it can create energy which is a motivating function and serves
to direct behavior where motivation already exists (Nadler, 1977). Data feedback can
begin at the top of the organization and cascade down or it can occur in a "bottom-
up" approach (Cummings & Worley, 2005). Feedback meetings typically provide an
opportunity for members to discuss and interpret the data and then develop action
plans to address any issues.
It was evident by the results of the initial survey that respondents did not feel
management would respond or act upon the results of the survey. An employee
communications meeting was held shortly after the results of the survey were
received in October of 2006. Often, there is a preconceived notion that if a meeting is
held and the results are discussed, little else will happen. Yet, it is a process for a
springboard to development if handled appropriately (Bowers, 1973).
In order to pursue developing an action plan, focus groups were held with a cross-
sectional selection of volunteer employees. With survey data, participants can
interpret the meaning of a question differently in terms of how they respond (Church
70
& Waclawski, 1998). To attempt to calibrate a general understanding of the results of
the survey, employees could expound and explain their stance on the questions. With
the results of these sessions summarized confidentially, the management team created
action plans and interventions to address each area of focus and began
implementation in late 2006.
Specifically, the CSU focused on the following areas:
• Managing Performance/Employee Development - The CSU wanted to start the
process of developing employees and encouraging a higher level of performance.
In order to determine what employees wanted with respect to development, the
CSU used an appreciative inquiry (AI) approach. All employees gathered for a
two day offsite workshop to explore what type of culture or environment the CSU
should have to support this initiative. The results of the AI workshop would be
integrated into CSU action plans. If the organization was going to change, it
would have to change its culture and the employees would need to actively
participate to make it happen.
In addition, the introduction of a formal development action plan called
Development Dialog was implemented. Each employee and their respective
supervisor were required to develop an action plan together for the next two to
five years. These would be recorded and reviewed twice a year to ensure that
employees were making progress and utilizing the opportunities for growth.
71
Personal development was also encouraged for the first time. Employees could
take courses or seminars in areas of interest that were related to the business but
not necessarily their job. Education in all facets from classroom learning to hands
on community service was promoted.
Finally, formal management development training programs were introduced.
Managers had never been through any kind of supervisory training; for the first
time supervisors were provided training for basic management essentials in
addition to performance management. Workshops were held to learn how to
consistently evaluate employees throughout the service unit as well as how to
coach employees. Workshops were also conducted for employees on performance
management and their role in developing their careers. It was not the
responsibility of the supervisor to ensure development but rather it was a
participatory process where the employee had to take the first action for
determining the career interests with the supervisor providing support.
• Managing Alignment of Rewards and Recognition Programs - Recognition and
rewards were other areas of focus. A spot award program was initiated where
supervisors could recognize an employee for a job well done or a project
completed with a monetary reward. It was important to time the recognition with
the successful completion of a task or project. This allowed supervisors to
72
acknowledge an employee for a specific task even if the employee was an
"average" performer. It accentuated the positive.
In addition to one time spot awards, the organization recognized that it did not
differentiate between an employee who met expectations and one who exceeded
expectations. A merit increase of 3.5% for a meets expectations and 4.0% for
exceeds expectations did not recognize nor incent higher performance. The
service unit then provided an additional 3-4% lump sum amount for those who
exceeded. Higher performance had to be recognized and encouraged.
These programs also had to be communicated to employees. It was important for
employees to know that they existed and could be utilized. At employee
communication meetings, the programs were discussed and reviewed. At
leadership meetings with managers, the programs were also reiterated to ensure
employees were appropriately being recognized.
• Communications - Communications was a final focal point. Employee
communications meetings were held three times a year to provide updates and
information to all employees. Different speakers and topics were covered each
time but the meeting also allowed for the communication of new programs or
updates. This was also the best setting to provide employee feedback from survey
73
data. The results of the employee survey were discussed and updated each year at
the communications meetings.
Plans for company announcements were cascaded throughout the entire service
unit. Often, only top-level managers would receive notice of new individuals or
global news. A new procedure was put in place to distribute all published
announcements to all CSU employees. In addition, a service unit website was
created to store such announcements and for information that all employees could
access. It would house all websites and links to various company initiatives.
Finally, as the service unit employees did not feel that they understood, nor felt
that anyone ever told them about the overall direction of the global company, a
Board of Management member was invited to attend a CSU employee
communications meeting on an annual basis. This would provide an opportunity
for employees to ask questions and receive responses directly from those who set
the strategy.
A timeline of events was established to monitor the interventions that were
conducted between surveys. This provided the opportunity to review the overall
number of interventions and communications in relationship to the exhibited
survey results and to track major and minor instances. The timeline of events can
be found in Appendix A.
74
These interventions would specifically address areas of the talent management
action plans, developed by CSU management. In order to measure the success of
the interventions, both quantitative and qualitative measures would be evaluated.
Quantitative
The quantitative method explores data based employee surveys. A world-wide
company employee engagement survey was conducted for the first time in May of
2006 at CoatCo. This questionnaire was developed by an outside consultant and was
administered on an electronic basis to all CoatCo employees through the company
intranet. There were 52 questions utilizing a Likert- scale response scheme (1 =
strongly agree; 5 = strongly disagree). All responses were confidential. The survey
responses were collected on a global basis with reporting provided back to the
business units and service units on a country level. This study examined the US
country service unit (CSU) as compared to the other US business unit (US BU)
results of the survey. The global population was not included as cultural differences
were not being taken into account. It focuses on American practices and norms.
The original intent of the survey as defined by CoatCo addressed nine topical areas of
importance to management: commitment to values, customer focus, developing
others, innovation, managing performance, quality commitment, results orientation,
stimulating an open climate, and teamwork. These topical areas reflected the values
and priorities for the overall business as determined by the global management team.
In addition, participants were asked to identify supervisory status.
75
A second employee survey was administered in 2007 to the CSU group to gauge how
the employees were responding to the interventions and feedback based upon the
2006 survey results. These questions were a subset of the 2006 survey but were
customized for the service unit. The survey was conducted electronically and
responses were collected on a confidential basis.
A pulse survey was also conducted in 2007. This was distributed to a random
sampling of employees around the world to gauge if talent management initiatives or
engagement had increased for the world-wide organization. The survey content and
questions were the same as the 2006 world-wide survey.
A final employee survey in this study was conducted in May of 2008. The 2008 pulse
survey mirrored the first survey conducted in 2006 and was sent to a random sample
of the population for completion. The survey was also sent to all CSU members so
that it could be determined if engagement had increased as a result of the
interventions during the prior two years.
The results of the surveys were provided and distributed back to the CSU employees
each year at employee communications meetings so that they were informed of the
progress and impact of the action plans.
76
A list of the questions that were on the survey for each of the three years it was
conducted are listed in Table 3 and the survey response rates are listed in Table 4.
The survey questionnaires for each year can be found in Appendix B.
Table 3. Employee Engagement Survey Questions
Employee Engagement Survey Dimension
2006, 2007, 2008 Survey Questions for US-wide & Pulse survey and 2006 & 2008 CSU survey questions
2007 CSU US Survey
Commitment to Values
1. My immediate supervisor is open and honest with me.
2. Within my department we take action if the company's Business Principles are challenged or violated.
3. Employees in my department are treated in a fair and equitable manner.
4. My Business Unit/Service Unit acts socially responsible in the community where I work.
5. In my Business Unit/Service Unit we practice what we preach.
Table 3 continues
77
Customer Focus 6. Within my department we know who our most important customers are.
7. Within my department we work to understand our customers' needs.
8. Within my department we act on customer complaints.
9. Within my department we constantly look for better ways to serve our customers.
10. Within my department we objectively measure customer satisfaction.
Developing Others 11. My immediate supervisor delegates responsibility to me.
12. My immediate supervisor discusses my future career with me.
13.1 have opportunities for further development within my current job.
14.1 see clear opportunities for my next job.
15. My organization offers the support and resources I need for my development.
10. My immediate supervisor discusses future opportunities with me.
11. My immediate supervisor delegates responsibility to me.
12.1 have opportunities for further development within my job.
13.1 see opportunities for my next job.
14. My organization offers the support and resources I need for development.
Table 3 continues
78
Innovation 16.1 am encouraged to be innovative on my job.
17. Within my department we search for new ways to work and do business.
18. Within my department new ideas are effectively implemented.
19. Within my department generating new ideas is recognized.
20. My Business Unit/Service Unit provides innovative products and services.
Managing Performance
21. My immediate supervisor sets ambitious objectives for my department.
22. My immediate supervisor clearly explains how my performance is evaluated.
23. My immediate supervisor gives me regular feedback on my performance.
24. My immediate supervisor is a good coach for me.
25. There is a clear link between my performance and pay.
4. I understand how my personal objectives support my department's goals.
5. Within my department, generating new ideas is encouraged and recognized.
6. My immediate supervisor gives me regular feedback on my performance.
7. My immediate supervisor explains how my performance is evaluated.
8. Appropriate rewards and recognition are provided for my performance.
9. There is a clear link between my performance and pay.
Table 3 continues
79
Quality Commitment 26. Where I work, we take appropriate measures to protect the environment.
27. Within my department we ensure employee safety.
28. Within my department we continually work to improve working conditions.
29. Within my department we learn from our mistakes.
30. Within my department we recognize efforts to improve quality.
Results Orientation 31.1 understand the goals of my department.
32.1 understand how my personal objectives support my department's goals.
33. My department produces results that exceed expectations.
34. My department acts with great urgency where change is required.
35. Senior management gives employees a clear picture of title direction the company is headed.
Table 3 continues
80
Stimulating Open Climate
36. My immediate supervisor asks for opinions and suggestions from employees.
37. Within my department people can challenge the present way of doing things.
38. Within my department we value diversity in our employees.
39. We have adopted ideas from people outside my department.
40. My Business Unit/Service Unit keeps employees informed about matters affecting us.
2. Senior management of the world-wide organization provides a clear picture of the direction the company is headed.
3. Senior management of my Service Unit provides a clear picture of the direction the company is headed.
15. Management of the worldwide organization keeps employees informed about matters affecting us.
16. Management of the Service Unit keeps employees informed about matters affecting us.
17. My manager keeps me informed about matters affecting me.
Teamwork 41. My immediate supervisor encourages teamwork.
42.1 have shared my personal objectives with my colleagues.
43.1 understand the influence my job has on the work of others.
44. Within my department we work effectively as a team.
45. Within my department we look proactively for opportunities to cooperate with others.
Table 3 continues
81
Engagement 46.1 get a feeling of personal accomplishment from my work.
47.1 am satisfied overall with my Business Unit/Service Unit as a place to work.
48.1 would recommend my Business Unit/Service Unit to others as a good place to work.
49.1 will not leave CoatCo in the near future.
50.1 am proud to be part of my Business Unit/Service Unit.
51.1 am proud to be part of CoatCo.
1. I am proud to be a part of the Company.
18. I am satisfied overall with my Service Unit as a good place to work.
19. I am proud to be a part of this Service Unit
Other 52.1 am confident management will act on the results of this survey.
53.1 have attended a feedback meeting with our department on the 2006 Employee Survey (2007 & 2008 Pulse survey question).
54. We are following an action plan from the 2006 Employee Survey (2007 & 2008 Pulse survey questions).
20. Management acted upon the results of the last employee survey.
21.1 am confident that management will act on the results of this survey.
82
Table 4. Survey Response Rate
Survey Year
2006 US BU Survey US CSU Survey
2007 US BU Pulse Survey US CSU Survey
2008 US BU Pulse Survey US CSU Survey
Responses Received
3,252 88
1,461 37
3,606 82
Response Rate
66% 72%
50% 40%
60% 75%
For analysis purposes, the three years of data is roughly equivalent in terms of
representing the population. The same populations were sampled and included in the
survey population. As the survey was originally developed for business purposes by
an outside consultant for CoatCo, the global firm was not using the survey for the
referenced talent management model in this research study.
The data received from these surveys was statistically analyzed to determine if any of
the talent management drivers had significantly affected employee engagement.
Factor analysis was chosen as, "Its fundamental purpose is to help a researcher
discover and identify the units or dimensions, called factors, behind many measures"
(Kerlinger & Lee, 2000). In effect, it explains what measures measure the same thing
and to what extent they measure what they are intended to measure. Factor analysis is
83
an iterative process in order to find an optimal solution. It reduces a large number of
measures to a smaller number by discovering which ones go together and the
relationships between them. This is a powerful method of construct validation
(Kerlinger & Lee, 2000). The factor analysis of the data in this study evaluated what
factors, if any, were significant in defining employee engagement and what factors
were significant in a talent management strategy that promotes employee
engagement.
Factor analysis was utilized to test whether or not the theoretical assignments were
valid. It analyzed how much variance the retained factors have on engagement and
allowed an analysis to determine what factor or factors explains a majority of the
variance. Factor analysis was also a statistical quality check for the employee
engagement and talent management constructs. In addition, it showed the strength of
association within the constructs.
Finally, the means were calculated to determine improvement in the factor constructs
over time. The means look at changes over a time period utilizing a multivariate
analysis of variance (MANOVA).
The qualitative exploration of this study examines and considers if the quantitative
results of the surveys are confirmed and explained as well as identifies through which
dimensions improvement in engagement can be accomplished by employing a talent
84
management strategy over time. With the annual surveys deployed, it was possible to
decipher any changes in the talent management dimensions that occurred over time.
The qualitative data would be another piece of the triangular exploration toward
validating the quantitative findings.
Qualitative The qualitative data was collected through observations and interviews and analyzed
utilizing a coding process developed by Strauss and Corbin (1998).
Observations
Observations were gathered from various workshops that were conducted with the
CSU group of study. These included the appreciative inquiry and performance
management workshops. The data gathered was reviewed and coded so it could be
compared and contrasted with the overall concepts that were emerging. This is
another source of validity for the constructs (Spradley, 1980).
Interviews
In order to determine how participants interpreted and defined key concepts in the
surveys and to gain a better understanding of why they responded in certain ways,
twelve employees were chosen randomly from the CSU group to conduct semi-
structured interviews. Five members of the management team were interviewed to
validate the senior management responses compared to lower level supervisors and
employees. The interviews with all participants were semi-structured allowing
participants to elaborate in areas of their choice. The first round of interviews with
five employees asked open-ended questions aimed at the research questions and
85
written from an appreciative inquiry stance (Cooperrider & Sekerka, 2003; Ludema,
Whitney, Mohr, & Griffin, 2003; Reed, 2007). This approach enabled the participants
to respond to questions from their own positive perspective. They could simply tell a
story. The questions were probing which resulted in collecting details from the
interviewees (Rubin & Rubin, 2005). Based on these interviews, evidence was
collected to construct key concepts.
The second set of interviews with another sample of seven employees was conducted
after the first round had been coded and analyzed. Concepts derived from the first set
of interviews were then incorporated into the second round and provided validity
around the concepts developed (Yin, 2003). The researcher conducted the interviews.
Copies of the interview questions are in Appendix C.
The interviews were recorded and transcribed so that they could be coded and
analyzed. Consistent with the exploratory approach, a coding strategy was used that
maximized the discovery and findings. The coding process developed by Strauss and
Corbin (1998) was chosen for its well documented steps and applications. Strauss and
Corbin outline the coding process with three phases: open coding, axial coding, and
selective coding.
86
Open Coding
Coding is a dynamic and fluid process (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). It is the beginning
of the process for theory building which entails conceptualizing, defining categories
and developing categories in terms of their properties and dimensions.
Conceptualizing involves grouping similar items or ideas based upon common links.
It reduces large amounts of data to smaller, more manageable data. The categories are
then formed from the small groups and compared against properties. There can be
different dimensions along the properties and it is at this point that patterns emerge.
The researcher coded all the interviews. Each sentence was coded to capture events,
happenings or interactions (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). A word or code was used to
describe the word or phrase and recorded on the document. When the exact word or
phrase is used directly from the text, it is called an in-vivo code (Strauss & Corbin,
1998). As each document was coded, it was important to identify interesting
quotations as well as to compare the coding to earlier documents. A definitive part of
the process was to constantly compare and contrast the different coding throughout
the documents to determine if the same categories emerge and are valid or if they
change (Strauss & Corbin, 1998).
87
In order to rule out any single coder bias, another colleague was educated on the
process of coding and asked to code portions of the interviews. This was to establish
inter-rater agreement for the codes.
After coding an interview, a memo was written which is a way to define and analyze
ideas that come from the text. The codes were then entered into spreadsheets and
analyzed for similarities so that categories could be created. The categories would
create families of themes or ideas that would provide further definition. This process
was iterative as constant comparing and redefining occurred. A sample of the coding
categories is listed in Table 5 below.
88
Table 5. Open Coding Categories
Open Coding Categories
Influencers
Interesting, Fun & Enthusiastic Work
The mentality around here that allows it to occur
Care
Come to Understand
Back bone of Company
Tenure
Flat Periods
Stimulation
If you're not growing, you're stagnant
Helping Industry
Appreciate the Nuances
Test the Water
Puppeteer Stuff
Fair Shake
Reflection
They heard but they didn't really hear
Pigeon Hole People
Kudos
Based on the categories that surfaced, open coding memos were written which assists
with the next step that is axial coding.
89
Axial Coding
With axial coding, the goal is to systematically develop and link categories (Strauss &
Corbin, 1998). This involves identifying actions, conditions and consequences
associated with a phenomenon and asking questions such as why, how come, when
and where in order to uncover relationships among categories. It is looking at categories around an "axis" and relating them to each other.
Through written memos and drawing frameworks of categories, an analysis of the
relationships and various codes was conducted. Figure 2 is an example of one such
framework.
90
Boring, Dry Periods
2
a <0
Interesting Job
c a) 3
5
•E
2 CO
Challenging, Stimulating, Variety
Figure 2. Axial Coding Framework
In order to facilitate the mapping of ideas and dimensions, whiteboards and paper
posters were utilized which assisted with viewing the bigger picture of talent
management emerging.
Selective Coding
Selective coding is the process of integrating and refining theory (Strauss & Corbin,
1998). The researcher is analyzing the relationships and looking for a central
explanatory concept. According to Strauss and Corbin (1998), a central category
possesses the power to pull all of the categories together to form an explanatory
whole. This is a key part of the exploratory process.
91
In the broadest sense, the selective coding process should develop an explanatory
concept for the research in question. Based upon the exploratory nature of the case
study, a central theme should emerge. A central category mapping could materialize
in some form similar to Figure 3 where this is a central theme with key influencing
factors.
Interesting Work
> Employee Engagement
Influencer Climate
Figure 3. Selective Coding toward a Central Category
The coding process will create the support for explanations based on the quantitative
results and allow for expansion of ideas in this field study exploration.
Code Checking
Miles and Huberman (1994) suggest specific guidelines for code checking. First, it is
best to have more than one person code data. If there is a disagreement among
definitions, it means the explanation may need to be expanded. Second, code
92
checking is a good reliability check. Third, they suggest that more than one person
code the same data in order to discuss it together.
In this study, the data was checked at various times. Several of the interviewees were
provided with preliminary results and diagrams to confirm it related back to their
comments and discussions. Parallel coding was conducted also with another
colleague to eliminate any single coding bias and establish inter-rater agreement for
the codes.
Triangulation
By combining the three methods of quantitative, qualitative and intervention data, it is
possible to reach conclusions with valid reasoning. In addition, with the longitudinal
perspective of measuring this change and its effects over a period of time, conclusions
and implications can be reliably developed. The triangulation also provides an
opportunity to incorporate the learning that occurs as the research emerges over a
period of time. Through exploration of the study and by applying the learning, the
field case study results in a rich analysis of data with evidence to support the
conclusions.
Summary
This chapter outlined the methods used in the field case study of CoatCo to research a
talent management strategy. Employee surveys and interviews provided quantitative
and qualitative data respectively. The interventions which included an appreciative
inquiry workshop, implementation of employee development and performance
93
management programs, as well as various communication efforts play a significant
role in allowing a triangular approach for exploration. It gives the case and research
more relevant data for analysis.
The next chapter discusses the results of the employee survey data and the qualitative
interviews as explored through the lens of the talent management model. It defines
and describes the dimensions of a talent management strategy that drives employee
engagement. It also expands on the intervention efforts and outcomes to provide a
triangulation of the results.
Chapter 4: Findings and Results Organization of Field Study Findings
The focus of this study is to explore a talent management model and it's affect on
employee engagement. It is critical to be able to define the drivers within a talent
management strategy that will enhance or increase employee engagement. Further, it
is important to define the key dimensions of employee engagement so emphasis can
be enforced on areas that will be effective in integrating HR/OD strategy and the
overall organizational strategy.
The proposed model defines employee engagement with the following dimensions:
• Job is challenging/meaningful • Have resources to do job • Trust in management • Perceived support from organization • Perceived support from supervisor • Rewarded and recognized • Safe to Act • Committed to organization
If these dimensions are positively embedded and perceived by employees, they
should be actively engaged. However, identifying the key drivers of engagement
dimensions is an essential first step.
The model proposes the following talent management dimensions as positively
impacting employee engagement:
• Communication
94
95
• Employee development • Rewards and recognition • Managing performance • Open climate/culture
If these key drivers are enabled within an organization, employee engagement should
increase. The field study explores how a talent management strategy can be built and
implemented to positively engage employees towards accomplishing organizational
goals.
With various interventions occurring within the CSU, it is important to be able to
measure and monitor the results of the talent management strategy and its impact on
engagement. This chapter will present the quantitative, qualitative and intervention
longitudinal results and findings of the study. They will be presented from a
triangulation perspective where it becomes evident that the survey results are
supported by the interviews as well as the interventions. An overview of the
triangulation will be presented followed by detailed descriptions of each component
of the triangulation which includes the quantitative, qualitative and intervention
findings.
Summary of Results
The talent management model presented in Chapter 2 (Figure 1) is valid based upon
the results of the case study. Employee engagement did increase based upon a talent
management strategy. Key drivers of talent management emerged as did the key
96
dimensions of employee engagement which positively impacted overall employee
engagement. These drivers were supported through the qualitative interviews and
results of the CSU interventions. Table 6 provides an overall summary of the results
and corresponding corroboration.
Table 6. Talent Management and Employee Engagement Drivers and Supporting Dimensions
Key Drivers/Dimensions
Derived from Quantitative Survey
Data
Talent Management:
1) Continuous Work Environment Improvement
2) Open Climate
Applied Interventions
Appreciative Inquiry (AI) workshop on CSU culture and employee development; flexible work schedules implemented, merit differentiators and spot awards implemented
AI workshop on CSU culture; flexible work schedule implemented
CSU Survey Results 2006 to
2008
2006 Mean
2.32
2.29
2008 Mean
4.05
4.01
Corresponding Emergent Themes from Qualitative
Interviews
Interesting Work (freedom, involvement, challenging, variety, learning, development) and Climate (flexible, trust, willingness, recognition)
Climate (flexible, trust, willingness, recognition) and influencers (caring managers, people)
Table 6 continues
97
Key Drivers/Dimensions
Derived from Quantitative Survey
Data
Applied Interventions
CSU Survey Results 2006
to 2008
Corresponding Emergent Themes from Qualitative Interviews
3) Communication; Clear Top Management Direction
Communications action plan (quarterly employee meetings, informational websites, Board of Management visits)
2.93 3.73 Influencers (mentor, team, people, managers providing feedback, involvement, knowledge) and Climate (trust, flexible, willingness, recognition)
Employee Engagement
1) Coaching Supervisor
2) Performance Development
Management development programs implemented
2006 2008 Mean Mean
2.12 3.83
Performance management and development dialog workshops initiated and programs implemented; cross-training initiated
2.63 3.20
Influencers (caring manager who is supportive, proactive, and approachable) and Interesting Work (freedom, involvement, challenging, learning and development)
Interesting work (development which focuses on strengths, opportunities, growth) and Climate (trust, flexible, willingness, recognition)
Table 6 continues
98
Key Drivers/Dimensions
Derived from Quantitative Survey
Data
Applied Interventions
CSU Survey Results 2006
to 2008
Corresponding Emergent Themes from Qualitative Interviews
3) Transparent Trust AI workshop on CSU culture and employee development; management development programs implemented
2.36 3.70 Climate (trust, flexible, willingness) and Influencers (caring manager)
4) Meaningful Accomplishments and Challenging Work
5) Commitment
AI workshop on employee development; development dialog program implemented
AI workshop on employee development and culture; development dialog program implemented; performance development workshops; communications action plan
2.93 3.73
2.15 3.89
Interesting work (freedom, involvement, challenging, variety, learning, development) and Influencers (caring manager, self)
Interesting work (freedom, involvement, challenging, variety, learning, development) and Influencers (caring manager, self, mentor, team, feedback, involvement)
The survey data showed significant improvement for employee engagement utilizing
a talent management strategy. The talent management drivers of a continuously
improving work environment along with an open climate and clear communication
99
were corroborated by employee and manager interview themes of interesting work,
climate and influencers. These were defined as the talent management drivers. These
findings then correlated to the engagement results where employees were found to be
engaged and committed with a supervisor who was a good coach, where growth
opportunities and challenging work were encouraged and where transparent trust was
inherent.
The environment and culture at the CSU changed and a talent management strategy
was formalized. The climate changed from one where communication was low and
information not shared to a more open environment with regular communication
meetings and feedback openly encouraged. Employees were provided with
opportunities to explore new challenges and development through cross-training and
project work. This evolved through the talent management strategy where employees
were engaged and linked to the overall organizational strategy.
The details of the key drivers from the survey results will be explained in the
quantitative survey results and findings section and is followed by the supporting
evidence of the qualitative interviews. A summary of the interventions that occurred
and the corresponding results are described as well.
100
Quantitative Survey Results
The employee engagement survey was sent to all US CoatCo employees in May of
2006. There were 4,927 employees who were contacted to complete the survey and,
of these, 3,252 (66%) responded. The CSU had 122 employees invited to participate
and 88 (72%) completed the survey.
Follow-up surveys were distributed and completed in 2007 and 2008. These follow-
up surveys were conducted with a sample of the larger population but were big
enough to be statistically valid. In 2007,2,922 employees were asked to participate
and 1,461 (50%) responded. In 2008,6,010 employees were asked to participate and
3,606 (60%) responded. More employees were asked to participate in 2008 as CoatCo
had acquired another large company effective January 1, 2008. However, for analysis
purposes, all three years of data were considered to be equivalent for representing the
general population. Survey data was also specifically collected for the CSU and, in
2007,93 employees were invited to participate and 37 (40%) responded while in
2008, 109 employees were invited to participate and 82 (75%) responded.
The survey utilized a Likert-scale response scheme (1 = strongly agree; 5 = strongly
disagree). For ease of interpretation in the statistical analyses, the scale was
transposed to 5 = strongly agree; 1 = strongly disagree.
101
Factor analysis was used to explore and interpret the components of the talent
management model (Figure 1). This factor analysis determined what underlying
psychological dimensions (factors) characterize employee engagement and talent
management. Responses from managers were used to determine the talent
management constructs and the responses from employees were used to determine the
engagement constructs. It is the management team that implements a talent
management strategy and it is the subordinates who are measured on engagement.
This study does not look to prove direct cause and effect, but by utilizing a different
group for each dimension, it diminishes any bias due to item response overlap. In
addition, CoatCo generally releases access to data but declined to measure which
groups they belong. It is impossible to match individuals with supervisors. This was
minimized and controlled for by using engagement only for employee responses and
talent management only for supervisory responses. Ideally, it would best to have both
to measure in the future.
Engagement Construct Factor Analysis In order to identify the employee engagement concept, a factor analysis was
conducted. The steps of the process are outlined below.
Reassign Scales to Theoretically Valid Constructs The variables chosen for the factor analysis were based upon the talent management
model constructs and correlated questions from the employee survey. Table 7 shows
the engagement dimensions and the corresponding survey questions that were used
for the factor analysis.
102
Table 7. Engagement Dimension and Corresponding Survey Questions
Engagement Dimension 2006,2007,2008 Survey Questions for US-wide & Pulse survey and 2006 & 2008 CSU survey questions
2007 CSU US Survey
Job is challenging and meaningful
11. My immediate supervisor delegates responsibility to me.
13.1 have opportunities for further development within my current job.
14. I see clear opportunities for my next job.
16.1 am encouraged to be innovative on my job.
17. Within my department we search for new ways to work and do business.
18. Within my department generating new ideas is recognized.
21. My immediate supervisor sets ambitious objectives for my department.
46.1 get a feeling of personal accomplishment from my work.
11. My immediate supervisor delegates responsibility to me.
12.1 have opportunities for further development in my job.
13.1 see opportunities for my next job.
Have resources to do job 15. My organization offers the support and resources I need for my development.
14. CSU offers the support and resources I need for development.
Table 7 continues
103
Trust in management 35.
Perceived support from organization
Senior management gives employees a clear picture of the direction the company is headed.
40. My Service Unit keeps employees informed about matters affecting us.
52.1 am confident management will act on the results of this survey. (This is question 57 in the 2007 pulse survey and question 59 in the 2008 pulse survey)
3. Employees in my department are treated in a fair and equitable manner.
5. In my Service Unit we practice what we preach.
2. Senior Management of CoatCo world-wide provides a clear picture of the direction the company is headed.
3. Senior Management of CSU provides a clear picture of the direction the company is headed.
15. Management of CoatCo world-wide keeps employees informed about matters affecting us.
16. Management of CSU keeps employees informed about matters affecting us.
20. Management acted upon the results of the last employee survey.
21.1 am confident that management will act on the results of this survey.
Table 7 continues
104
Perceived support from supervisor
1. My immediate supervisor is open and honest with me.
12. My immediate supervisor discusses my future career with me.
23. My immediate supervisor gives me regular feedback on my performance.
24. My immediate supervisor is a good coach for me.
36. My immediate supervisor asks for opinions and suggestions from employees.
41. My immediate supervisor encourages teamwork.
44. Within my department we work effectively as a team.
45. Within my department we look proactively for opportunities to cooperate with others.
6. My immediate supervisor gives me regular feedback on my performance.
7. My immediate supervisor explains how my performance is evaluated.
10. My immediate supervisor discusses future opportunities with me.
17. My manager keeps me informed about matters affecting me.
Table 7 continues
105
Rewarded and recognized
Committed to organization
19. Within my department generating new ideas is recognized.
23. My immediate supervisor gives me regular feedback on my performance
25. There is a clear link between my performance and pay.
30. Within my department we recognize efforts to improve quality.
47.1 am satisfied overall with my Service Unit as a place to work.
48.1 would recommend my Service Unit to others as a good place to work.
49.1 will not leave CoatCo in the near future.
50.1 am proud to be a part of my Service Unit.
51.1 am proud to be a part of CoatCo.
5. Within my department generating new ideas is encouraged and recognized.
7. My immediate supervisor explains how my performance is evaluated.
8. Appropriate rewards and recognition are provided for my performance.
9. There is a clear link between my performance and pay.
1. I am proud to be part of CoatCo.
18.1 am satisfied overall with CSU as a good place to work.
19.1 am proud to be part of CSU.
Table 7 continues
106
Safe to Act 2. Within my department we take action if the company's Business Principles are challenged or violated.
19. Within my department generating new ideas is recognized.
29. Within my department we learn from our mistakes.
37. Within my department people can challenge the present way of doing things.
39. We have adopted ideas from people outside my department.
5. Within my department generating new ideas is encouraged and recognized.
Company Pride 51.1 am proud to be a part ofCoatCo.
1. I am proud to be part ofCoatCo.
Work Unit Pride 50.1 am proud to be a part of my Service Unit.
19. I am proud to be part ofCSU.
Work Unit Satisfaction 47.1 am satisfied overall with my Service Unit as a place to work.
18.1 am satisfied overall with CSU as a good place to work.
Action on Survey 60.1 have attended a feedback meeting with our department on the 2006 Employee Survey (from the 2008 pulse survey; it is question 58 in the 2007 pulse survey))
61. We are following an action plan from the 2006 Employee Survey (from the 2008 pulse survey; it is question 59 in the 2007 pulse survey)
20. Management acted upon the results of the last employee survey.
107
Three samples of employee respondent data were created to obtain the factor
structure. The factor analysis allowed distinct patterns to emerge. As the patterns
emerged, they were tested against another iteration of sample data to ensure construct
validity. Once the patterns were determined and validated, they could be used as a
scale to measure the construct.
Variance and Strength of Association
As a result of iterative factor analysis process, four factors emerged to characterize
the engagement construct. Component one is labeled coaching supervisor, component
two is performance development, component three is transparent trust and,
component four is meaningful accomplishments. Together, they explain 69.55% of
the variation within the included variables. The factor which explains the most
variance, component one (21.02%), is characterized by high-loading questions about
the relationship of the supervisor to the employee. Table 8 shows the variance
explained by the four factors.
108
Table 8. Engagement Construct: Total Variance Explained
Comp onent
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Total
6.991
1.033
.992
.721
.644
.599
.512
.491
.432
.364
.355
.328
.311
.228
Initial Eigenvalues
%of Variance
49.936
7.375
7.089
5.152
4.598
4.279
3.654
3.504
3.087
2.600
2.536
2.343
2.221
1.625
Cumulative %
49.936
57.311
64.400
69.552
74.150
78.429
82.083
85.587
88.675
91.275
93.811
96.154
98.375
100.000
Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings
Total
2.943
2.470
2.190
2.134
%of Variance
21.024
17.643
15.644
15.241
Cumulative %
21.024
38.668
54.311
69.552
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Table 9 displays the engagement construct and the four component factors with their
corresponding factor loadings. Generally, the strength of the factor loading should be
.65 or higher. This means that the item "loads" well on a given factor and "belongs"
there.
109
Table 9. Engagement Construct
Rotated Component Matrix* Component
1 2 3 4
Q36 Supervisor asks opinions and suggestions from employees Q41 Supervisor encourages teamwork
Q24 Supervisor is a good coach
Q23 Supervisor gives me regular feedback on my performance
Q12 Supervisor discusses future career
Q13 Opportunities for further development in job
Q25 Clear link between performance and pay Q15 Organization offers support and resources for development
Q05 In BU, we practice what we preach
Q59 Confidence Mgmt will act on survey results
Q03 In dept. we are treated fairly
Q33 My dept. produces results exceeding expectations
Q32 I understand how personal objectives support depts. Goals Q46 Feeling of personal accomplishment from work
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Equamax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 9 iterations.
Component one, labeled coaching supervisor, accounted for the highest explanation
of engagement. The questions involved the supervisors interacting with their
subordinates. When opinions or suggestions are asked of subordinates, they will feel
.766
.730
.714
.684
.575
.743
.707
.655
.791
.699
.661
.783
.695
.685
110
more highly engaged. The supervisor who encourages teamwork and offers regular
feedback provides employees opportunities to become engaged and they are more
likely to act on that opportunity.
Performance development, the second component, interpreted as providing
opportunities for further development in an employee's current job was also a
significant variable as was performance and pay. Employees want to feel that they are
being paid appropriately for their work and being rewarded based upon performance.
Being treated fairly also involves trust of the supervisor and management and
practicing what they preach which is explained in component three. It takes a lot
more action to walk the talk. This is the authenticity that becomes apparent with trust.
Component four, the challenge and accomplishment of a job is also important along
with striving to exceed the expectations. Discussing future career plans did not load
high but has to be questioned if a supervisor is acting as a coach or just in a pure
supervisory manner when discussing career paths. This may also imply that an
employee has to take some ownership as well instead of waiting for the supervisor to
act.
The definition of engagement can be difficult to conceptualize especially when
individual satisfiers may have some effect on engagement. The model considers this
effect and in order to address the concern of looking at engagement as a concept in
addition to the individual drivers, a factor analysis was conducted with the overall
I l l
factors of engagement including commitment. Five factors explain 71.53% of the
variance. These five factors (components) are as follows: component one is
commitment, component two is a coaching supervisor, component three is
performance development, component four is transparent trust and component five is
meaningful accomplishments. Commitment is the factor that explains the most
variance (48.85%) and is characterized by high-loading questions about the
relationship of the how the employee feels committed to the organization. Table 10
displays the five components that explain the variance.
112
Table 10. Engagement and Commitment Constructs: Total Variance Explained
Compo
nent
Initial Eigenvalues Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings
Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
9.281
1.806
1.019
.758
.727
.642
.561
.532
.479
.440
.431
.402
.364
.348
.326
.311
.228
.179
.167
Extraction Method: Pi
48.845
9.503
5.365
3.990
3.824
3.381
2.952
2.801
2.520
2.316
2.271
2.115
1.916
1.832
1.713
1.635
1.198
.940
.881
48.845
58.348
63.714
67.703
71.527
74.908
77.860
80.661
83.182
85.498
87.768
89.884
91.800
93.631
95.345
96.980
98.178
99.119
100.000
3.300
3.073
2.617
2.437
2.163
17.367
16.175
13.775
12.826
11.385
17.367
33.541
47.316
60.142
71.527
Method: Principal Component Analysis.
When commitment values are factored into the analysis as a dependent value, it is
evident that engagement also includes dimensions such as satisfaction of working at
the organization and proud to work for the company. Generally, the strength of the
113
factor loading should be .65 or higher. This means that the item "loads" well on a
given factor and "belongs" there. Table 11 shows the engagement and commitment
construct.
Table 11. Engagement and Commitment Construct
Rotated Component Matrix* Component
1 2 3 4 5
Q50 Proud to be part of BU
Q51 Proud to be part of CoatCo
Q49 Will not leave CoatCo in near future
Q48 Recommend BU as a good place to work
Q47 Satisfied with BU as place to work
Q46 Feeling of personal accomplishment from work Q36 Supervisor asks opinions and suggestions from employees Q41 Supervisor encourages teamwork
Q24 Supervisor is a good coach Q23 Supervisor gives me regular feedback on my performance
Q12 Supervisor discusses future career
Q13 Opportunities for further development in job
Q25 Clear link between performance and pay
Q15 Organization offers support and resources for development Q05 In BU, we practice what we preach
Q03 In dept. we are treated fairly
Q59 Confidence Mgmt will act on survey results
Q33 My dept. produces results exceeding expectations Q32 I understand how personal objectives support dept goals
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Equamax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 10 iterations.
.788
.779
.746
.634
.631
.549
.772
.744
.711
.675
.563
.730
.717
.644
.763
.651
.605
.860
.690
114
Proud to be part of the service unit and the organization both load extremely high.
When combined with the intent of staying at the firm and recommending the firm as a
good place to work, the overall value of commitment is highly significant. The other
components are also still highly significant in this factor analysis which concludes
that that engagement is multi-faceted and holistic in nature.
Supporting Evidence for Construct Categorization
The challenge of working with data defined by practical needs of an organization
needs to be able to enhance theoretical concepts. To develop and integrate the
practical with the theoretical, factor analysis was conducted. To further authenticate
the statistical validity of the results, the Cronbach's alpha for each component was
also calculated. Cronbach's alpha measures how well a set of items measures a single
unidemensional construct. It is a coefficient of reliability and scalability. If the
Cronbach's alpha is 0.7 or greater, there is high reliability that the questions grouped
together are all measuring the same component. Table 12 lists the Cronbach's alphas
for the engagement construct.
Table 12. Cronbach's Alpha for the Engagement Construct
Engagement Construct Cronbach's Alpha
Commitment 0.91
Coaching Supervisor 0.88
Performance Development 0.77
Transparent Trust 0.77
Meaningful Accomplishments/ 0.70 Challenging Work
115
Since all of the Cronbach's alphas are 0.70 or above, there is high reliability within
the scales for each engagement component. The questions grouped together
consistently measure the corresponding component.
The survey questions in the engagement construct can also be validated through
comparison and review of other prior research. Table 13 validates the components in
the engagement construct through literature review for categorizing the questions into
the corresponding component.
116
Table 13. Validation of the Engagement Construct based on Survey Questions
Construct & Survey Questions
Literature Definition
Supporting Evidence for Construct
Convergence or Divergence
Employee Engagement Coaching Supervisor
Q36 Supervisor asks opinions and suggestions from employees Q41 Supervisor encourages teamwork Q24 Supervisor is a good coach Q23 Supervisor gives me regular feedback on my performance Q12 Supervisor discusses future career
Employee engagement fosters support from managers (Lockwood, 2006), strong manager-employee relationships remain a crucial ingredient in engagement (Employee Engagement Report 2006, 2006); Regular, specific feedback is essential for high engagement (Employee Engagement Report 2006, 2006)
Emotional commitment to manager (Driving performance and retention through employee engagement, 2004); supportive manager (D. R. May, R. L. Gilson, & L. M. Harter, 2004); manage-employee relationship is often the "deal breaker" (Lockwood, 2007); help find solutions to problems, respect and care for employees, (Driving performance and retention through employee engagement, 2004); recognition and feedback from supervisor (Vance, 2006)
Convergence -good match although one study cites senior level managers have more influence than direct supervisors
Table 13 continues
117
Construct & Survey Questions
Literature Definition
Supporting Evidence for Construct
Convergence or Divergence
Performance Development
Q13 Opportunities for further development in job Q25 Clear link between performance and pay Q15 Organization offers support and resources for development
Transparent Trust
Q05 In BU, we practice what we preach Q03 In dept. we are treated fairly Q59 Confidence Mgmt will act on survey results
Employee engagement fosters development and learning as well as recognition and reward (Lockwood, 2006); getting more opportunities at what employee does best and career development engages employees {Employee Engagement Report 2006, 2006) Trust in senior level leadership is essential for engagement (Debunking the Myths of Employee Engagement, 2006);
Involvement in work processes such as conceiving, designing and implementing workplace changes (Lockwood, 2007); job enrichment and resources available (D. R. May et al., 2004); understanding prospects for future growth (Vance, 2006)
Treat employees with dignity and respect creates a workplace culture that fosters loyalty and engagement (Ramarajan & Barsade, 2006)
Convergence -very good match
Convergence -good match
Table 13 continues
118
Construct & Survey Questions
Literature Definition
Supporting Evidence for Construct
Convergence or Divergence
Meaningful Accomplishment/Cha llenging Work
Q33 My dept. produces results exceeding expectations Q32 I understand how personal objectives support dept goals
Willingly do more than is expected if engaged (Employee Engagement Report 2006, 2006)
Dedication refers to a sense of inspiration, pride, significance and challenge at work (Driving performance and retention through employee engagement, 2004); opportunity to perform well at challenging work and understanding the link between one's job and the company's mission (Vance, 2006)
Convergence -fair match
Commitment
Q50 Proud to be part ofBU Q51 Proud to be part ofCoatCo Q49 Will not leave CoatCo in near future Q48 Recommend BU as a good place to work Q47 Satisfied with BU as place to work Q46 Feeling of personal accomplishment from work
Commitment and line of sight drive engagement (Debunking the Myths of Employee Engagement, 2006); proud to work for the company (Employee Engagement Report 2006, 2006)
The extent to which employees entrust to something or someone in their organization; how hard they work; how proud they are to work at the company how long they stay as a result of that commitment (Driving performance and retention through employee engagement, 2004); How proud to work for the company and intent to stay with the firm (Measuring True Employee Engagement, 2006)
Convergence very good match
All of the categories provide a good convergence in terms of defining the components
with the appropriate survey questions and topics. The one component that is
119
somewhat marginal is meaningful accomplishments. Challenging work can entail
more than a willingness to try to do something. It may not necessarily mean
exceeding expectations. It could simply be meeting the expectations of the task.
However, overall, they provide a good match for validation of the engagement
construct.
Means
In order to determine if there were significant differences over time between the CSU
and the other business units in the US, a multivariate analysis of variance
(MANOVA) was generated. MANOVA helps to assess the effects of independent
variables on dependent variables (Kerlinger & Lee, 2000). The US business units
served as a comparison group to determine if any change or improvement occurred.
The interventions were implemented with the CSU so the other business units served
as a quasi-experimental control group. The detailed results of the MANOVA analysis
are in Appendix D.
The mean scores for the engagement dimensions all significantly increased as listed
in Table 14. They were calculated based on a Likert scale of 1 to 5 with 5 = strongly
agree and 1 = strongly disagree. The overall engagement and commitment factor
increased from 2.15 in 2006 to 3.89 in 2008. Table 15 displays the percentage of
survey respondents that agreed with the statement listed under the component. Each
statement can be presented as a percentage but since there are multiple items for each
component, it is not possible to turn a composite mean score into an overall
percentage in order to safeguard the natural variation along the scale. This preserves
the statistical validity of the constructs (Cook & Campbell, 1979).
Table 14. Means for Engagement Dimensions
Engagement Dimension
Overall Engagement including commitment Coaching Supervisor
Performance Development
Transparent Trust
Challenging and meaningful accomplishments
2006 Mean US
BUs 3.70
3.52
3.06
3.31
3.84
US
csu 2.15
2.12
2.63
2.36
1.98
2008 Mean US
BUs 3.89
3.64
3.24
3.70
3.86
US CSU 3.89
3.83
3.20
3.70
3.92
121
Table 15. Percentage of Survey Respondents that Agree with the Statement under each Engagement Dimension
Engagement Dimension 2006 2008 % Agree % Agree us us us us~
BUs CSU BUs CSU
Overall Engagement including commitment Q50ProudtobepartofBU/SU 72% 2% 86% 76% Q48 Recommend BU/SU as a good place to 63% 11% 73% 70% work Q47 Satisfied with BU/SU as good place to 66% 11% 67% 74% work Coaching Supervisor Q36 Supervisor asks opinions and suggestions 65% 6% 67% 87% from employees Q41 Supervisor encourages teamwork 74% 4% 75% 81% Q24 Supervisor is a good coach 51% 10% 54% 60% Q23 Supervisor gives me regular feedback on 53% 15% 55% 71% my performance Performance Development Q13 Opportunities for further development in 44% 30% 49% 46% job Q25 Clear link between pay and performance 37% 29% 35% 34% Ql5 Organization offers support and resources 48% 17% 52% 57% for development Transparent Trust Q50 In BU/SU we practice what we preach 58% 11% 75% 65% Q03 In dept. we are treated fairly 58% 15% 67% 72% Q59 Confidence management will act on 39% 17% 60% 61% survey results Challenging and meaningful accomplishments Q33 My dept. produces results exceeding 64% 7% 58% 74% expectations Q321 understand how personal objectives 79% 4% 82% 78% support departmental goals
122
Figures 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 graphically show the positive changes in the means that
occurred for the CSU as compared to the BUs in each of the engagement components.
Figure 4. Means for Overall Engagement including Commitment
4.5
4
£ 3.5 4»
* 3
2
* ,_ _ , - *
,.. ...=•... ~r... _ . . _ . , ..it. .._.,.,.._,..„,...
* •
.*^ "'• _, i i c Ql Itt _ y.„ . , i ua BUS \,
s** USCSU f
2006 2008 Year
Figure 5. Means for Coaching Supervisor
123
Figure 6. Means for Performance Development
4.5
4
S3.5 « 4>
2.5
2
4* «*•*
— — - • — ~ — ^ — — • • ' ' " Uo B U S i
1 uscsu I i ,., ,., „ „ ,..,,, ,J
2006 2008
Year
Figure 7. Means for Transparent Trust
124
3 ^
• ^ ^ U S B U s
* U S C S U
2006 2008 Year
Figure 8. Means for Challenging and Meaningful Accomplishments
These graphs all indicate the significant change in engagement.
Talent Management Construct Factor Analysis A factor analysis was also conducted to identify the talent management concept and
drivers. The steps and results are described below.
Reassign Scales to Theoretically Valid Constructs
The variables chosen for the factor analysis were based upon the model constructs
and correlated questions from the employee survey. Table 16 shows the talent
management dimensions and the corresponding survey questions that were used for
the factor analysis.
4
1 3.5
3
2.5
125
Table 16. Talent Management Dimension Survey Questions
Talent Management Dimension
2006,2007,2008 Survey Questions for US-wide & Pulse surveys and 2006 & 2008 CSU survey questions
2007 CSU US Survey
Communication 1. My immediate supervisor is open & honest with me.
31.1 understand the goals of my department.
32.1 understand how my personal objectives support my department's goals.
35. Senior management gives employees a clear picture of the direction the company is headed.
40. My Service Unit keeps employees informed about matters affecting us.
60.1 have attended a feedback meeting with our department on the 2006 Employee Survey (from the 2008 pulse survey)
61. We are following an action plan from the 2006 Employee Survey (from the 2008 pulse survey)
2. Senior management of CoatCo world-wide provides a clear picture of the direction the company is headed.
3. Senior management of CSU provides a clear picture of the direction the company is headed.
15. Management of CoatCo world-side keeps employees informed about matters affecting us.
16. Management of CSU keeps employees informed about matters affecting us.
17. My manager keeps me informed about matters affecting me.
Table 16 continues
126
10. My immediate supervisor discusses future opportunities with me.
11. My immediate supervisor delegates responsibility to me.
12.1 have opportunities for further development in my job.
13.1 see opportunities for my next job.
14. CSU offers the support and resources I need for development.
Employee Development 11. My immediate supervisor delegates responsibility to me.
12. My immediate supervisor discusses my future career with me.
13.1 have opportunities for further development within my current job.
14.1 see clear opportunities for my next job.
15. My own organization offers the support and resources I need for my development.
16.1 am encouraged to be innovative in my job.
17. Within my department, we search for new ways to work and do business.
18. Within my department new ideas are effectively implemented.
19. Within my department generating new ideas is recognized.
42.1 have shared my personal objectives with my colleagues.
Rewards and Recognition 30. Within my department we recognize efforts to improve quality.
33. My department produces results that exceed expectations.
5. Within my department generating new ideas is encouraged and recognized.
8. Appropriate rewards and recognition are provided for my performance.
Table 16 continues
127
Managing Performance
21. My immediate supervisor sets ambitious objectives for my dept.
22. My immediate supervisor clearly explains how my performance is evaluated.
23. My immediate supervisor gives me regular feedback on my performance.
24. My immediate supervisor is good coach for me.
25. There is a clear link between my performance and pay.
41. My immediate supervisor encourages teamwork.
4.1 understand how my personal objectives support my department's goals.
6. My immediate supervisor gives me regular feedback on my performance.
7. My immediate supervisor explains how my performance is evaluated.
9. There is a link between my performance and pay.
Open Climate 28. Within my department we continually work to improve working conditions.
29. Within my department we learn from our mistakes.
34. My department acts with great urgency where change is required.
36. My immediate supervisor asks for opinions and suggestions from employees.
37. Within my department people can challenge the present way of doing things.
38. Within my department we value diversity in our employees.
39. We have adopted ideas from people outside my department.
45. Within my department we look proactively for opportunities to cooperate with others.
5. Within my department, generating new ideas is encouraged and recognized.
128
Three samples of respondent data (supervisors) were created to obtain the factor
structure. The factor analysis allowed distinct patterns to emerge. As the patterns
emerged, they were tested against another iteration of sample data to ensure construct
validity. Once the patterns were determined and validated, they could be used as a
scale to measure the construct.
Variance and Strength of Association
Three factors characterize the talent management construct. They explain 70.55% of
the variation within the included variables shown. Table 17 shows the variance
among the three variables.
Table 17. Talent Management Construct: Total Variance Explained
Extraction Sums of Rotation Sums of Squared Initial Eigenvalues Squared Loadings Loadings
%of Cumulative %of Cumulative %of Cumulative Component Total Variance % Total Variance % Total Variance %
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9
4.342 48.247
1.099 12.212
.908 10.094
.626 6.960
.475 5.273
.432 4.802
.398 4.426
.378 4.199
.341 3.786
48.247
60.459
70.553
77.513
82.786
87.589
92.014
96.214
100.000
4.342 48.247
1.099 12.212
.908 10.094
48.247
60.459
70.553
2.210 24.551
2.142 23.805
1.998 22.196
24.551
48.357
70.553
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
129
The three factors that emerged as significant were component one labeled continuous
work environment improvement, component two labeled open climate and,
component three labeled communication/clear top management direction. Table 18
displays the talent management construct and the three component factors with their
corresponding factor loadings.
Table 18. Talent Management Construct
Rotated Component Matrix*
Component
1 2
Q28 In dept. we work to improve working conditions .823
Q30 In dept. we recognize efforts to improve quality .786
Q29 In dept. we learn from mistakes .780
Q39 Have adopted ideas from people outside dept. .804
Q37 In dept. people can challenge the way of doing things
Q38 In dept. we value diversity in employees .744
Q35 Senior Mgmt give employees a clear picture of the company direction
Q25 Clear link between performance and pay .761
Q40 My BU keeps employees informed about matters affecting us
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis Rotation Method: Equamax with Kaiser Normalization
a. Rotation converged in 6 iterations.
The continuous work environment improvement (component one) had the highest
factor loading. This is significant as it relates to improving processes and working
792
.738
130
conditions. It relates to the ability to make a mistake and learn from it rather than
being punished. An open climate was also significant (component two). Employees
can challenge the way of doing things and adopt ideas from others. A final significant
factor was communication (component three). Knowing the direction and vision of
the company from a high level as well as being informed locally was important.
Employees also value a clear link between performance and pay. From a managerial
viewpoint, this is a communication to employees informing them of their worth to the
supervisor and to the company. From an employee perspective, it is feeling a sense of
equity with respect to rewards and recognition. All of these components have a large
strength of association (.65 or higher) within this talent management model.
Supporting Evidence for Construct Categorization
Similar to the engagement construct, Cronbach's alphas were calculated for each
talent management component to authenticate the statistical validity of the factor
analysis results. Cronbach's alpha measures how well the set of survey questions
measures the identified component. A Cronbach's alpha of 0.7 or greater purports a
high reliability that the questions grouped together are all measuring the same
component. Table 19 lists the Cronbach's alphas for the talent management construct.
Table 19. Cronbach's Alpha for the Talent Management Construct
Talent Management Construct Cronbach's Alpha
Continuous Work Environment Improvement 0.81
Open Climate 0.79
Communication; Clear Top Management 0.77 Direction
131
Since all of the Cronbach's alphas are 0.70 or above, there is high reliability within
the scales for each talent management component. The questions grouped together
consistently measure the corresponding component.
The survey questions in the talent management construct can be validated through
comparison and review of other prior research. Table 20 validates the construct
through literature review for categorizing the questions into the corresponding
components.
Table 20. Validation of the Talent Management Construct Based on Survey Questions
Construct & Survey Literature Supporting Convergence Questions Definition Evidence for or Divergence
Construct Talent Management Continuous work Employees will environment improvement be engaged if
they work in a Q28 In dept. we work to respectful improve working conditions environment Q30 In dept. we recognize (Measuring efforts to improve quality True Employee Q29 In dept. we learn from Engagement, mistakes 2006)
Table 20 continues
Physical and psychological well-being affect quality of work (Crabtree, 2005); Foster a workplace environment that caters toward improvements (Salanova et al., 2005)
Convergence -Good match in terms of interpretation of working environment
132
Construct & Survey Questions
Open climate/culture
Q39 Have adopted ideas from people outside dept. Q37 In dept. people can challenge the way of doing things Q38 In dept. we value diversity in employees
Literature Definition
Effective employee engagement fosters an environment of stimulation (Lockwood, 2006)
Supporting Evidence for Construct Foster open workplace culture through engagement (Salanova et al., 2005); safe to act environment leads to more engagement employees (D. R. May et al., 2004)
Convergence or Divergence Convergence -Good match but there is some overlap with the continuous work improvement environment; safe to act or acceptable to learn from mistakes could be in this dimension as well.
Communication: Clear top management direction
Q35 Senior Mgmt give employees a clear picture of the company direction Q25 Clear link between performance and pay Q40 My BU keeps employees informed about matters affecting us
Senior level leaders have more impact on employees than direct supervisors (Debunking the Myths of Employee Engagement, 2006); organization strategy is well communicated (Employee Engagement Report 2006,2006); Employees want to be fairly rewarded for their work (Measuring True Employee Engagement, 2006)
Good internal communication (Driving performance and retention through employee engagement, 2004); clear, consistent and honest communication is an important management tool for engagement (Lockwood, 2007); communicate from top down to build employee confidence and buy-in (Kress, 2005)
Convergence - very good match
133
All of the categories provide a good convergence in terms of defining the constructs
with the appropriate survey questions and topics. There is some overlap between the
open climate and a continuous work environment improvement. It is encouraged in
both components to have a safe environment where employees can make mistakes
without the fear of punishment. Individuals learn from errors. Employees need to
know that they have the freedom to try new ideas and challenge old ways of doing
things. It is clear that the environment and culture play a role but with potential
impact in both dimensions, the probability is high that overall, they both provide a
good match for validation of the talent management construct.
Means
Since the talent management action plan which was developed and implemented by
the management of CSU would be the main cause of effect on employee engagement,
a MANOVA analysis was performed to see if any significant changes occurred within
the talent management drivers. The full MANOVA analysis can be found in
Appendix D.
Based upon the results, the mean scores for the talent management dimensions all
increased significantly as listed in Table 21. They were calculated based on a Likert
scale of 1 to 5 with 5 = strongly agree and 1 = strongly disagree. Table 22 displays
the percentage of survey respondents that agreed with the statement listed under the
component. Each statement can be presented as a percentage but since there are
multiple items for each component, it is not possible to turn a composite mean score
134
into an overall percentage in order to safeguard the natural variation along the scale.
This preserves the statistical validity of the constructs (Cook & Campbell, 1979). The
positive results of each talent management component over time are displayed in
Figures 9,10 and 11.
Table 21. Means for Talent Management Dimensions
Talent Management Dimension
Continuous Work Environment Improvements Open Climate
Communication; Clear Top Management Direction
2006 Mean US
BUs 4.01
3.80
3.34
US CSU 2.32
2.29
2.93
2008 Mean US US
BUs CSU 4.08 4.05
3.92 4.01
3.51 3.73
Table 22. Percentage of Survey Respondents that Agree with the Statement under each Talent Management Dimension
2006 2008 % Agree % Agree
~us us us us" BUs CSU BUs CSU
Continuous Work Environment Improvement Q28 In dept. we work to 79% improve working conditions Q30 In dept. we recognize 77% efforts to improve quality Q29 In dept. we learn from 86% mistakes
Talent Management Dimension
7%
10%
3%
86%
79%
87%
65%
92%
96%
Table 22 continues
135
Open Climate Q39 Have adopted ideas 69% 11% 72% 65% from people outside dept. Q37 In dept people can 73% 14% 81% 79% challenge the ways of doing things Q38 In dept. we value 74% 3% 81% 83% diversity in employees Communication; Clear Top Management Direction Q35 Sr. Mgmt give 81% 38% 79% 68% employees a clear picture of the company direction Q25 Clear link between pay 47% 24% 28% 58% and performance Q40 My BU/SU keeps 57% 24% 70% 77% employees informed about matters affecting us
The mean for each talent management component in 2006 and 2008 for the CSU as
well as the BUs are displayed in Figures 9,10 & 11.
136
4.5
4
1 3"5
3
2.5
2
•
,, _ _ „ . . . rff....... ...
•<» 1 IC D l I n ' • • UJ> BUS
US CSU 1 S , „mm„,mlll,„mta ,„H , „,,,„• „,„,,?:
2006 2008
Year
Figure 9. Means for Continuous Work Environment Improvement
4.5
4
1 3.5 x 3
2.5
2
•
2006
JU.
• * *
*^ >* r
2008
Year
-US BUS j
US CSU 1 i!
Figure 10. Means for Open Climate
137
Figure 11. Means for Communication; Clear Top Management Direction
The talent management dimensions all increased significantly for the CSU, while on
the whole, nothing changed on a US-wide basis. At the very least, the CSU was
positively impacting and improving both its talent management and engagement
scores.
Significant Differences between Years
The overall results exhibit improvement for the CSU in all dimensional categories.
However, when the questions are individually analyzed through an ANOVA analysis
to determine if there were significant changes in responses over time, all but two
questions displayed significant differences. There was no significant improvement for
the question of having opportunities for further development in the job nor was there
any improvement for the question of a clear link between performance and pay in
138
2007 or 2008. In addition, the overall results show that there was no significant
change from 2007 to 2008. The results for the CSU are listed Table 23.
Table 23. ANOVA Results of Talent Management and Engagement CSU Questions
SigDif SigDif SigDif 2006 2007 2006 2008 2006 2007
Question (p<05) (p<05) (p<05) Sample Size 84 36 73 Overall Engagement/Commitment Q47 Satisfied with BU as place ' ,-1 . 01 Y
to work Q48 Recommend BU as a good ,_ ~, , g. Y
place to work Q50 Proud to be part of BU 2.02 4.1 Y Q51ProudtobepartofCoatCo 1.93 4.22 Y 4.25 Y N Coaching Supervisor Q23 Supervisor gives me regular feedback on my 2.53 3.86 Y 3.71 Y N performance Q24 Supervisor is a good coach 2.32 Na 3.6 Y Q41 Supervisor encourages . „ , ,, . ,_ ., . , • 2.06 Na 4.17 Y teamwork Q36 Supervisor asks opinions ^ . XT . on v
and suggestions from employees Qll Supervisor delegates 184 4 05 Y 412 Y N responsibility Performance Development Q13 Opportunities for further 2 g5 3 og N N
development in job Ql5 Organization offers support _ „ „_ Y - - ^ „ and resources for development Q25 Clear link between _ ., . .. XT . A_ XT XT _c , 3.01 3.05 N 3.07 N N performance and pay
Table 23 continues
139
SigDif SigDif SigDif 2006 2007 2006 2008 2006 2007
Question (p<.05) (p<.05) (p<.05)
Transparent Trust Q03 In dept. we are treated fairly 2.15 3.84 Y Q05 In BU, we practice what we _ . ~ . ~. Y
preach Q59 Confidence Mgmt will act „ _ „ _1 y N
on survey results Meaningful Accomplishment Q46 Feeling of personal _ „<- 41 v accomplishment from work Q33 My dept. produces results _ __ i Q7 Y exceeding expectations Q311 understand the goals of 1 ,> 4 n Y my dept. Continuous Work Environment Improvement Q30 In dept. we recognize _ lg 3 86 Y efforts to improve quality Q28 In dept. we work to _ .„ 3 73 Y improve working conditions Q29 In dept. we learn from 1 Q, 4 07 Y mistakes Open Climate Q37 In dept. people can challenge ~ .,g 1 74 Y the way of doing things Q38 In dept. we value diversity in employees Q39 Have adopted ideas from people outside dept. Communication; Clear Top Management Direction Q25 Clear link between performance and pay Q35 Senior Mgmt give employees a clear picture of the 2.86 3.46 Y 3.6 Y N
2.15 3.85 Y
2.55 3.59 Y
3.01 3.05 N 3.07 N N
company direction Q40 BU keeps employees informed about matters affecting 2.56 3.72 Y 3.7 Y N us
140
There are several factors that could drive the outcomes for little significant difference
between 2007 and 2008. One includes the possibility that not enough time had
elapsed for the next level of engagement to transpire. The interventions need more
time to produce a stronger impact. Another possibility is that that attention the
employees were receiving positively affected them initially but after a period of time,
no longer had an impact. This is similar to the Hawthorne effect (Cook & Campbell,
1979). A third consideration is that the survey questions did not specifically ask
employees about improvements but rather how they felt at one point in time rather
than compared to previous years. However, the overall change from 2006 to 2008 is
significant which demonstrates a change did occur with respect to talent management
strategy having an impact on employee engagement.
Quantitative Findings
Engagement and Talent Management Constructs
Based on the results of these statistical analyses, there is clear improvement of the
engagement scores for the CSU. The four significant engagement components that
emerged from the initial analysis concluded that coaching, performance development,
transparent trust and meaningful accomplishments were important for employee
engagement. The importance of the supervisor acting in a role as a coach is
emphasized. There must be support from the supervisor. If there is support, the
employee can feel safe to act. The employee will also be more engaged if there is
development within the job and a future career path. Trust in the supervisor and
141
management is also vital. The employee needs to feel challenged as well as a sense of
contribution towards meaningful accomplishments at the company.
When commitment is added to the analysis to more fully explore the holistic concept
of engagement, the significance of the model continues to grow. Commitment
becomes another variable within the engagement construct. It is the psychological
aspect of how an employee feels satisfied with the job and the organization which
also contributes to engagement. If these factors are regarded positively, employees
are more likely to be engaged.
The talent management components derived from the factor analysis are statistically
significant. Continuous work environment improvement, open climate and
communication all contribute to a talent management strategy as provided in the
model. These dimensions are statistically significant factors for complementing and
increasing employee engagement.
Rewards and recognition also factor into both the talent management and employee
engagement constructs but did not show significant improvement. Although the talent
management action plan of the CSU did not specifically focus on rewards, it did
implement a few programs. This is an area where more in-depth research may need to
occur. However, the components derived from the factor analysis do correspond to
the talent management model lens, and, if they are included in a talent management
142
strategy, employees are likely to become even more highly engaged as evidenced by
the survey results.
Talent Management Model The proposed talent management model presented in Chapter 2 is valid based upon
the quantitative results as a lens for viewing and pursuing a talent management
strategy. Communication and an open climate are distinctly identified as key talent
management components within the model. Continuous improvement within the work
environment is another key talent management component which encompasses the
employee development and managing performance dimensions. These include
focusing in areas such as improving quality and processes as well as challenging the
status quo. The rewards and recognition factors emerged in the communication area.
Employees want to ensure that they are receiving what they feel they deserve and
managers are informing employees what they are worth to the organization. Based
upon the quantitative results, the talent management construct is valid within the
model.
The model is also valid for the engagement construct. The five key components of the
construct that emerged from the data were identified within the model. The first
component identified was a supervisor who coaches. This factor was significant and
corresponded to the proposed model dimensions of perceived support from a
supervisor as well as existing in an environment that is felt by employees to be safe to
143
act. Mistakes can occur without repercussion and opinions can be openly voiced.
Feedback also occurs regularly.
The second component, performance development, encompasses the model
dimensions of having the resources and organizational support to do the job. It also
involves linking performance with pay. These interconnect together to support
engagement.
The third component, transparent trust, is essential and was validated by the data as
also proposed in the model. Trust in management must exist if engagement will
occur. Trust also means being treated fairly and appropriately.
The fourth component, meaningful accomplishments correlated to the model
dimensions as the job needs to be challenging and provide growth opportunities.
Finally, as the model also suggests, commitment to the organization is another
important factor. This was included in the factor analysis and was found to be
significant. Commitment is a psychological factor that plays a role in employee
engagement.
The model serves as a lens to develop a talent management strategy that links to
engagement. The purpose of this research is not to show cause and effect but rather to
144
explore how a talent management strategy can be positioned to enhance engagement
and, ultimately, organizational strategy. The factors in the model as verified by the
factor analysis are significant in a talent management strategy and when applied due
increase employee engagement.
When combined together, talent management and employee engagement enhance the
HR/OD strategy which is embedded in the organizational strategy. The culture,
communications and work environment are key factors in organizational strategy
which impact the direction and goals of the company. If employees are going to
accept and pursue change, they must be engaged. So, it is not necessarily that talent
management drives engagement which, in turn, drives HR/OD strategy and
organizational strategy, but rather they work in concert together.
Although the model is significant with positive results and change occurring over the
three year period, there are areas in the data that indicate change did not continuously
occur. There was little movement from 2007 to 2008. This could be a result of the
interventions being implemented in 2007 and continuing into 2008. The survey
timing occurred in May of 2007 and 2008 so only 1.5 years lapsed for progress via
the interventions. The action plan was not fully implemented and took longer to put in
place than expected. In addition, the expectation of the employees would be that
progress would continue moving forward but at a pace considered "status quo".
145
The initial baseline CSU engagement scores were considerably lower than the general
US scores and, therefore, the CSU had considerable improvement to become par with
the rest of the population. There are several factors that could account for the initial
difference. The service unit has a more difficult time developing and becoming part
of the business strategy. Each individual business unit has a product to sell and a
business to run. The service unit provides services which should integrate into the
overall business plan but it is more difficult to identify with the world-wide business
plan.
Another consideration is that fact that each function (i.e. tax, legal, audit, etc.) acts
and responds in a very decentralized and independent environment. Each function is a
"silo" with very little overlap or coordination. There are several functions such as tax
and legal that report directly into the corporate headquarters where others do not. This
causes a lack of unified goals and communication.
Third, a country service unit is very focused on providing the highest level services to
the business units in a country and they do not focus internally on themselves.
Programs may be rolled out globally or regionally, but the CSU must make a diligent
effort to focus on itself.
The CSU also did not move significantly beyond the comparison group means in any
dimension. Coaching and communication did exceed the US business unit population
146
score but not by a significant amount. It could be considered that the CSU did not
have enough time to fully implement the talent management action plan and measure
the outcomes of the interventions. The survey outcomes for 2009 could see additional
movement as the CSU progresses.
Quantitative Limitations These quantitative findings are significant and posit that a talent management strategy
does positively affect employee engagement. However, as Cook and Campbell (1979)
purport, there could be alternate reasons for the significant change that took place
within the study. It is possible that the employees of the CSU were being giving
attention that they had never earlier received and the impact was a perceived increase
in engagement. This is similar to the Hawthorne Effect where productivity did not
increase due to the planned experimental intervention but from the attention the
participants received within the study (Cook & Campbell, 1979). However, with the
length of the study and increases that continued over a two year period, it is most
likely that the Hawthorn Effect is not relevant. This supports the positive impact of
the interventions on talent management.
Controlling for the construct and measurement of engagement is another
consideration. Perhaps, engagement is not a true measure. Do employees or
organizations perceive that engagement is important and is it being measured
appropriately?
147
In order to control for these factors and confirm the quantitative results, triangulation
through qualitative interviews and the interventions is explored. The results and
findings of the semi-structured interviews will be discussed in the next section. The
findings of the interventions will follow the qualitative discussion.
Qualitative Results/Findings
There is an important link between quantitative and qualitative data. The debates
were outlined in Chapter 3 but it is important to emphasis the connection between the
two and the rationale to do so.
Rossman and Wilson (1984,1991) suggest three broad reasons: (a) to enable confirmation or corroboration of each other via triangulation; (b) to elaborate or develop analysis, providing richer detail; (c) to initiate new lines of thinking through attention to surprises or paradoxes, turning ideas around, providing fresh insight. (Miles & Huberman, 1994, p. 41)
The qualitative data supports the quantitative data outcomes.
Interviewing participants from the CSU gives insight and anecdotal evidence on
which talent management strategy factors affect employees' engagement and why
they feel those dimensions are important. Semi-structured interviews were conducted
and three dominant themes emerged that explain how a talent management strategy
affects employee engagement: (a) interesting work; (b) influential influencers; and (c)
the climate of the working environment. Figure 12 shows a mapping of the key
themes and the corresponding attributes.
148
Involvement
Freedom/Flexibility
Proactive, Supportive, Approachable
Safe
Challenging/ Contributing/Giving ^ ^
Variety
Development
Grow
Knowledgeable Feedback/communication Involvement
Trust Willingness
Figure 12. Key Talent Management Themes that Affect Employee Engagement
Each of these themes link back to the talent management and employee engagement
constructs. Many of the themes overlap both the talent management and employee
engagement dimensions. Figure 13 displays the connectivity of both constructs.
149
Interesting Work
Performance Development
Continuous Work Environment Improvement
Coaching Supervisor
Meaningful Accomplishments/ Challenging Work Commitmen
Talent Management
Strategy
Climate
Open Climate
Communications
Transparent Trust
Influencers
Figure 13. Qualitative Key Themes that Link to the Talent Management and Employee Engagement Constructs
A description of how the key themes support the talent management and employee
engagement constructs is examined in detail.
150
Supporting Qualitative Themes for the Talent Management Construct The talent management construct components are supported by the key themes that
emerged from the interviews. For each component, the supporting themes are
described.
Continuous Work Environment Improvement
Two themes from the coding of the interviews emerged that supported this
component. Interesting work and climate both had strong support.
Interesting Work
The concept of interesting work first needs to be defined. Interesting work involves a
lot more than simply being interested in a topic or job as described by participants of
the interviews. It is multi-faceted and is made up of several connecting attributes: (a)
freedom and flexibility; (b) challenging/variety of responsibilities; (c) involvement;
(d) contribution/giving back to the job or organization; (e) learning; and (f)
development. It is through these attributes that interesting work supports the talent
management construct of continuous improvement in the work environment.
Freedom and flexibility are essential to improving the work place environment. A
supervisor must have the freedom to develop and design a department structure so
that it runs smoothly and efficiently. If a supervisor rearranges a department from
time to time to fit the employee's strengths, employees must flexible enough to
change as well. As one supervisor noted:
So you have the freedom to rearrange your department from time to time to fit those strengths without adding to or subtracting from your
151
department. If I do this, I can get a different skill out of a person. But to do that the employees have to be flexible. In other words, they have to identify that you are doing this for a couple of reasons. One is to maximize the department's effectiveness but to also maximize the employee's effectiveness. And, you may be taking something away from somebody that maybe they think is valuable but in order to get your department going in the most effective manner, you need to do that.
As changes occur continuously, it is important to be flexible but to also have the
freedom to act.
Participation and involvement is also essential in building and improving the
environment. If employees do not have a say in what the improvements will be, they
may not buy into the plan. As one employee stated, "You have a say in the company"
and that is where employees can bring impact.
Another employee added that what keeps her at CoatCo is "the people and it's the
opportunity to get involved in stuff." And when employees are involved, then they
will have more opportunities for input. One long term employee made the statement
that "it makes you feel that you are more a part of the company than simply going
here after twenty years to the same place." It is "the ability to feel a part of it" and
"you do have a say in the company." Involvement is crucial to employees feeling that
they belong and contribute.
152
Learning and development is also important for improving the work environment.
People have to be given the opportunity to learn more and develop new skills if the
environment is going to be more effective. One participant stated that "I need more
opportunities to take on more things." Only by developing and providing
opportunities will employees improve the work place environment and productivity.
But it is not only interesting work that enhances the work environment. It is also the
climate of the organization.
Climate Climate is a key component in a working environment. It must be an open and
flexible environment with trust and appropriate rewards and recognition.
The working environment plays a role of providing a place for employees to
productively thrive in their work. Employees described a good environment as one
"where it is open, not just to suggestions, but an environment where you are free to
say opinions." It is a two-way street for communication. People have to want to be at
work because as one employee stated, "If you have an interesting job and a good
boss, but the environment is say confrontational, then people aren't going to want to
be here."
The environment must also support employee learning and growing. And, part of this
process is going to be making mistakes. Mistakes need to become learning tools and
153
not punishments. One employee described how her manager supported her even when
errors occurred: "If we make a mistake, he always figures out how we will learn from
it." Employees should not be afraid to make a mistake or take a risk for fear of
retaliation. If there is no fear of mistakes, they will be willing to learn new skills or
gain new knowledge. This type of environment promotes an open culture which
encourages learning and growing.
Flexibility and rewards are also important in terms of making changes when needed.
This comes from both the organizational and individual perspective. Employees need
to be flexible, too. Flexibility also entailed the ability to balance work and family life.
Without work life balance, work can become draining. One employee stated that
"maybe money is important, sure, but you know right now for me, I just need some
time away from here." Flexibility to schedule hours and days is also important to
employees. It takes "flexible work schedules to maintain that work family balance."
Recognition is not always about monetary rewards. In order to have that flexibility,
trust must be a part of the culture.
The climate of an organization will set the tone for the working conditions and
commitment of the organization to its employees. However, it is more than just the
working environment that contributes to a talent management strategy.
154
Open Climate Two themes from the coding of the interviews emerged that supported an open
climate as a talent management driver. The climate and influencers both contribute to
an open environment within an organization.
Climate
The climate of a company is important for setting the stage for change or
implementing an initiative. The CSU was described as a "dynamic environment"
which supports the continuous change process, but employees also expressed the need
for "an open environment where it's not dictatorial." In fact, one employee stated that
"the vision of the company has definitely taken a different turn; it's like evolving; it's
like all this talk, talk, talk, but now it's really happening." Employees could see that
the climate was changing and action was occurring instead of talk. The climate does
play a role in talent management.
Flexibility and rewards are also important just as they were referenced under the
continuous work environment dimension. Again, rewards do not necessarily have to
be monetary. "Change it; make it better; and the process of doing that is the reward."
That is not to say that recognition is not important. Many employees commented on
the recognition of accomplishing a project or task. "It is good to be recognized for
something that you had a say in" or that the "CEO recognized me for that
accomplishment." It is almost as if employees just want acknowledgement. "It's kind
of recognition or just that he (supervisor) knows that he knows I did it."
155
Influencers
An open climate also includes the impact of others on the culture and environment.
Any organization is made up of people but it is how these people interact and
communicate that can make a difference. One employee describes the culture of
people and how they work together at the CSU:
Sense of humor, sarcastic sense of perspective about the craziness that this company sometimes does have. Willingness to work hard and dig things out and I think, it's hard not to let, this company is not perfect, it certainly has its wackiness, has its frustrations, but I think being with people who get that and keep a sense of humor about it, recognize the wackiness, the frustrations and get through that together. I think that is huge. It's being in the trenches together mentality to a degree.
Employees spend so much time at their job that the interactions with people are
important. Consistently, when asked why individuals stay at the CSU, the common
response is "the people". One employee stated that "I tell everybody this is more your
family than your family. So whether you like to admit it or not, you know we are
family." People need to have "friendly colleagues who are also happy with their
current environment."
This also melds in with supervisors or managers. These individuals can impact a
climate as well. If it is an open climate, the supervisor can provide feedback and
allow for mistakes to occur in a safe environment. One employee describes bis
supervisor as someone who "always gives me the time" and "he will go to bat for me"
whenever an issue arises. Employees need to sense that it is acceptable to ask and
question processes but will also have the backing of his/her supervisor. This allows an
156
employee to learn new skills or concepts in a safe atmosphere and without
repercussions.
A part of this climate is trust. Employees have to have trust in their managers as well
as their colleagues to be open. One employee stated that, "I can't work if I can't trust
the people I work with."
An open climate is one prominent piece of a talent management strategy but
communications and clear directions also play a role.
Communication/Clear Top Management Direction
Two themes from the coding of the interviews emerged that supported a
communication and clear top direction as a talent management component. Both an
open climate and influencers contribute to successful communications within an
organization.
Climate
Without communication, employees have no goal or vision to try to achieve. It is the
ability to communicate in an open environment where information is free flowing that
is essential. Employees consistently communicated this message. One employee
emphasized that "open communication; that's what really gets my ideas flowing."
The influence of the culture and environment is also guided by top management and
employees alike.
157
Influences
Communication is a two-way path. Supervisors are encouraged to hear employee
opinions and suggestions. This has changed as one employee explained that with the
prior CEO, "I don't feel like he fostered that openness. I think that since the new CEO
has come on board, that's changed." Top management has a role in setting the stage
for the climate and culture. Employees want to know what is happening and what to
expect. It is only through communication that they can be informed. Another
employee stated that "I think it helps to have management up here who also continues
to trickle that [communication] down." Without leadership informing the employees
of the strategy, they would not know how to move toward a common goal or vision.
It is not only senior management that needs to keep everyone informed.
Communication also involves feedback from supervisors. Having a manager or
colleague provide feedback is vital. Both positive and constructive feedback need to
occur for improvements. Combining feedback with helping or guiding the employee
through the next steps produces a positive future. One respondent noted that "a
manager needs to give feedback more than once a year." Often, feedback is only
provided at the time of a performance appraisal. Employees want to know how they
are doing so expectations can be set and performance adjusted if necessary. One
manager noted that it is the responsibility of the manager to not only provide
feedback but to also assist with guiding the employee forward when he said, "I am
going to try to give you some feedback and I'll guide you for the next steps." This
158
allows for a supportive environment. It needs to be a "two-way" communication in an
environment where the employee is free to communicate. Continuous communication
must also occur from all levels. It is the constant feedback and open informational
flow that allows for employees to be aligned with top management goals and to
pursue improvement in their own job and career development.
Supporting Qualitative Themes for the Employee Engagement Construct
The employee engagement dimensions are also supported by the key themes that
emerged from the interviews. For each engagement dimension, the supporting themes
are described.
Coaching Supervisor
The two themes that emerged from the interviews that support a coaching supervisor
factor were influencers and interesting work. These two themes overlap in their
identification of the importance of supervisory support.
Influencers
The support of a manager providing encouragement and opportunities is essential for
employee development and engagement. However, a supervisor that is "caring"
emerged as a leader for employees. A caring manager was described by one employee
as "somebody that supports your development and thus supports your strengths."
Another employee described it as "somebody who cares enough to know when you
could be left alone but cares enough to know when he senses some stress here" and
yet another stated "somebody who is a little bit more intuitive." A caring manager
159
does not always have the expertise or knowledge to help an employee but can support
the employee and find the appropriate resources.
The key attributes of a caring manager that emerged are approachable, supportive and
proactive. One employee described a caring manager environment as "the helping
industry." A caring manager encourages questions and has an open door policy. But
could a caring manager also be a mentor? Is there a difference?
A mentor was defined by employees as "somebody that you know will take you
along" or who "might see more in you than what you see in yourself and "takes you
under their wing." A mentor can be different than a manager as described by one
employee:
I think a mentor, when I think of the word as someone who is really and maybe directly or indirectly but really kind of helping you along in some way, whether it's just giving the opportunity or guidance, where a manager can be someone who's very uninvolved in what you do and just wants to know the work's getting done.
Yet, some employees have had both a caring manager who is also a mentor. "I had
both somebody who was a caring manager who I would easily call a mentor." Both
encourage learning, teaching and growing. But, a mentor can be a person who an
employee does not feel afraid to speak with since the control of the job is ultimately
with the manager.
160
A supervisor also provides a safe environment for learning. Mistakes may occur but
they are used as an opportunity to learn. One employee describes a coaching
supervisor as one who "lets you fall on your face if you will and learn from your
experience." It is the opportunity for learning that counts rather than punishment for
the error. And, the supervisor should also be providing coaching to the employee for
developing new skills.
Interesting Work
A coaching manager provides freedom for employees to learn and engage. This
includes allowing employees to choose how or where to be involved in projects. One
employee made a statement to this effect very succinctly:
I think I kind of pushed myself into certain areas, too. Because I wanted to be involved in certain areas and I was allowed the freedom to do that at that point in time. So freedom is another criterion of engaging employees. It comes down to the desire of the employee to want to be involved and the freedom to use your expertise.
Without freedom on the job and to try new things, employees do not find the work
interesting.
Employees themselves linked freedom directly back to engagement. A supervisor has
to provide this freedom and be able to coach an employee to work on new skills as
part of the employee development plan. Freedom contributes to an employee's
engagement or a supervisor's interaction with employees.
161
Another key area that employees expressed a need for assistance from a supervisor is
development and career planning. A manager is viewed positive and helpful if he
"truly, honestly and sincerely has employees, has my welfare, has employees'
welfare, professional welfare, personal welfare, developmental welfare at heart." It is
a supervisor "who puts your development, your quality of life in their mind." The
supervisor truly wants to develop the employee and not just with job tasks but as a
whole person. Opportunities are created for employees to get involved in areas that
will let them grow. One supervisor commented that "there are certain talents that can
be acquired but you need to give them opportunity." It is acknowledged that the
supervisor has the responsibility for providing employees with growth opportunities
in order to advance but employees also have to participate in looking for
opportunities. One employee described a development opportunity he was able to
become engaged in:
We made a purchase offer and we said okay now we take this little project of three business units and they get this huge project of Chemical Company X very quickly. Alright, that's when we formed this team. I still wasn't officially taken out of my job. I more or less just kind of moved myself out of the job and into the project team. But that's when Phil headed up that project. So Phil [his boss] was my mentor on that project. Also, Bill from IT was a mentor as he had some good background in the whole logistics area. We learned off of each other.
This situation exemplifies where the employee took charge but was given the
opportunity from his boss.
162
It is readily apparent that the supervisor plays a large role in promoting employee
engagement. It is evident that how managers treat employees does affect employee
engagement.
Performance Development
The performance and development of employees is also critical for engagement. The
two themes that emerged from the interviews connecting to performance development
are interesting work and climate.
Interesting Work
In order for employees to develop, they must be given the freedom to pursue new
knowledge and skills. This freedom includes extending boundaries or creating new
ones. As one employee explained it, "the amount of freedom I have and the fuzzy
boundaries I have can be very good." This employee pointed out that freedom can
come from not having explicit boundaries around a job. She had freedom to go in
multiple directions to learn new knowledge. Freedom also means allowing "someone
to put their two cents into it." Open suggestions and being able to voice an opinion
are important for an employee to find interesting work which leads to learning and
development.
The opportunity to learn something new is appealing to most employees. Every
employee interviewed discussed a learning aspect of their job. Most often, employees
want an opportunity to learn something new. "Learning new things" was a common
theme and viewed as a positive trait. One employee commented that "if I stop
163
learning then things are not good." But the learning experience has different
dimensions including "learning from each other" to getting opportunities to go into
new fields to simply understanding the big picture of why someone completes a
certain task. Learning also occurs from errors or mistakes. As one supervisor stated,
"If it doesn't succeed, it's not going to be the end of the world, that it'll be a learning
experience." Interesting work is a continuous learning cycle.
Learning is a key element of employee development and performance. No employee
can be perfect all the time and mistakes will occur. But the ability to make
improvements based on past errors is essential and in order for employees to be
willing to work towards improvement, they must be properly coached to perceive the
challenge as positive. It will provide development for the employee and improvement
for the department. This has to be ingrained in the culture as well.
Development is another major factor of interesting work. Employees defined
interesting work to include development opportunities or embedding development
within the job. But what quickly emerged through the initial interviews was that
employees do not often even realize when development occurs. One employee made
the statement that "If I were to sit down and work on my resume, it would look so
much different than what it did ten years ago. And I would sit back and say, holy cow
that was development." Another noted after much thought that "development happens
on the job every day." Employees cross-train or learn a new skill and, in fact, it is
164
development. Recognizing and acknowledging development by employees was often
an afterthought.
Once an employee thought about development within their own personal situations or
careers, four key sub-dimensions consistently emerged: (a) opportunity; (b) stretch;
(c) strengths; and (d) grow. Opportunity involved the chance to get involved in
something new or to participate in a project with freedom to make decisions and lead
in a new direction. One employee discussed an opportunity as "it gave me the
opportunity to not only show what I knew but to be able to understand what CoatCo
knew." Opportunities are not always handed to employees; they are often spotted or
seeked out by employees. As one supervisor explained, "The employee needs to be
able to have a desire to look for these opportunities and, ask, not expect management
to come to them."
Advancement was also a part of development but it came through involvement and
opportunities to gain new knowledge. To learn new skills, employees would need to
stretch their goals or abilities to reach a higher level. Exposure to new ideas or
concepts would assist with development. Several employees made comments similar
to this one; "Giving assignments and projects that enhance your ability to use your
strengths" was seen as a positive. It was focusing on strengths as opposed to areas of
weakness. Employees felt that if managers acknowledged strengths and provided
work geared toward them, success was inevitable. As a result of the emphasizing
165
strengths, individuals would also grow. As one employee put it, "If you are not
growing, you're stagnant and what happens to stagnant water?" Job growth as well as
individual growth are important and are not always an easy path. In fact, "we're not
growing if everyone is patting us on the back." It involves the learning, challenge and
freedom to solve problems that when combined together, create interesting work. But
the interesting work must coexist in an open climate.
Climate
For development and growth opportunities to exist and expand, the climate or culture
of the organization has to support the efforts. Employees must feel they work in an
environment of trust especially with their supervisors. Through the interviews the
theme of "trusting them" or "somebody that I trust" was said continuously by
respondents.
There is also a willingness on the part of employees to learn new skills or cross-train
with others. This requires flexibility on both the part of the employee and the
organization. "Employees have to be flexible" but the organization also has to
provide a flexible environment. This includes providing flex time and alternative
work arrangements. Employees emphasized over and over again that "flexibility is
key" to maintain a positive climate.
166
Rewards and recognition also contribute to the climate and can take many forms.
According to the employees interviewed, intrinsic rewards were seen as very
important:
"The more projects that came through, the more rewarding I think it is."
"Change it; make it better, and the process of doing that is the reward."
"You service another group and in a way that's helpful to them and so that's the
reward."
They were not necessarily looking for more money but a reward that has a sense of
accomplishment. One employee stated that rewards should not be "just financially at
times, but also in opportunities.. .to me this is more key."
Recognition also is important whether it comes from a manager or from a colleague.
Employees feel good for being recognized and it enhances their working climate:
"Our executive CEO recognized me."
"It's good to be recognized for something you had a say in."
"If it was total non-recognition maybe after a while you would say, hey, maybe it's
not worth it."
167
Rewards are important and discussing pay and performance did not emerge in the
interviews. However, it remains a concern from a quantitative perspective.
Employees may be hesitant to discuss monetary rewards in person rather than via a
survey.
Recognition is important as part of the culture and climate of an organization as is
flexibility and freedom. In concert, they enhance the development and performance of
employees toward higher levels of engagement. This can be further influenced with
trust.
Transparent Trust
Trust is an essential element in the engagement concept. Employees will not become
engaged unless there is trust with a supervisor as well as the organization as whole.
This emerged through the two key themes of climate and infiuencers.
Climate
Trust is a basic building block of the climate. Employees must trust management and
management must trust employees. It is a two-way street. One employee described
the environment as "If I don't trust a manager, I am going to still be professional and
do my job, but I'm not going to be nearly as open." Work can still get accomplished
but the employee is not going to move to the next level if there is no mutual trust. The
manager has to also trust the employee. It also holds true for colleagues in a team
environment. An employee described a situation where she is working with
168
colleagues in her department and states, "It was a real problem and it's more you get
to the point of I can't work this way if I can't trust people I work with."
Trust also involves giving people the freedom to try something new or lead a project.
One employee described the trust relationship between herself and her manager:
And I was given, I mean, I felt like yes, I'm being told to go ahead and take the lead because you know the manager has this, you know, actually the faith in me that I can do it. Being able to do it from beginning to end.
Trust provides opportunity for employee growth as well as organization growth.
Influencers
Trust is also very apparent in how the manager and employee relate to each other.
Employees gain trust by having a knowledgeable and caring supervisor. As one
supervisor said, "It's just commitment to them; wanting them to do a good job and
maximize their career." This may be transparent to the employee but only if a
supervisor has this attitude will the employee reap the benefit by having support from
the supervisor for job development and advancement. In addition, if the supervisor
has a good relationship with the employee and there is trust embedded in the
relationship, the employee will view work in a more highly engaged state and is
likely to find more meaningful results from his work.
Meaningful Accomplishments/Challenging Work Employees want to know that the work they are completing and coordinating is
meaningful to the organization and they are making a contribution. In addition, if the
169
work is challenging, the employee is more likely to be engaged. Through the
interviews, two of the key themes evolved that supported meaningful work were
interesting work and influencers.
Interesting Work Interesting work provides challenges and offers a variety of tasks or opportunities.
One employee stated that:
I'm not enjoying this; this isn't making me happy at work when things are more routine and not challenging. You feel like you're just pushing papers and filling out forms and just doing things that you are just kind of spending time, but realize that you could do a lot more, a lot more higher level things I guess you would say...But the projects, the more projects that come through the more rewarding I think it (work) is.
The projects offer a variety from the routine daily work. It's the ability to put together
a puzzle from a mixture of pieces and make sense out of it. Another employee
described this puzzle:
Well, I think putting that puzzle together of taking something and making sense, make order out of chaos or at least you know taking a project and saying okay we've got to get it done. No one has said how and now you know it's my responsibility to get it done and find out who's going to do what or who's going to do it or yeah, how it has to get done. Something that's maybe not just straight forward, it's challenging to me because there is not a path yet. I am making the path. But certainly I enjoy that.
It may not be easy to solve that puzzle as another employee expressed that,
"Something challenging, even though it might be frustrating is interesting." She also
stated, "It's not until I'm challenged or I'm put into a position that I think I can do it."
170
Solving the puzzle with freedom and involvement is key to an engaged employee
even when it may not be easy to solve.
If the work is challenging, the outcomes are perceived as meaningful. An interesting
attribute that emerged from the interviews was the ability to make a contribution. The
concept of contribution entailed the ability to provide or give something back to the
job as well as to the organization as a whole. One employee discussed the ability to
utilize skills towards making a contribution. "You're utilizing skills that you've had
in the past and you're making a contribution. I think that's where the satisfaction
comes in." Other participants discussed the giving aspect and feeling like a
"contributor" to a greater good:
I mean you have to feel good about the contribution that you're making but then also the additional stuff and the really hard stuff and I'm saying that probably some people may not even believe in this, that you believe that the company you're working for is also contributing to something.
I think a lot of people get to the point in their lives where they want to feel good about that they are contributing something good to the world, not just contributing something good to their job or to the people that they work for because they care about the people that they work for and they like their job, but they may not necessarily be sold on the idea of the company.
Employees expressed a sense of "gratefulness" when they were contributing. One
employee put it well when he stated, "As long as I feel that I am making a
contribution to help CoatCo, to be a part of CoatCo, then I feel fine." Without a sense
171
of contribution and feeling good about making a difference, the work would not be
interesting.
Influencers
It is no surprise that supervisors can influence challenging work. What did emerge
from the interviews was the impact that the employees had on their job or work. It
was often a surprising element in a discussion for an employee to realize that there is
an internal element that can influence work and engagement. One employee
explained:
If I go back over my career and what I like about CoatCo and the job is I have over the years been given the opportunity to grab hold of opportunities and to challenge myself and to be able to learn through those experiences.
Another added:
If I just didn't say a word, I probably wouldn't be on it [the team]. It's my assumption looking back. So I as the employee took the initiative, spotting the opportunity and to let management know I thought I had something to contribute. I think I pushed myself into certain areas, too.
There is an internal drive that adds to an employee's desire to be better or to be at
work and to challenge one's self to improve. One employee called herself "internally
self driven." The internal thread is a piece that many employees have inside that
allows them to commit and try harder.
Well, if I give someone my word then I can't go back to that so I'm just committed, but that's just the individual that I am. If I take something on, I have to do it the best I can do it. That's where I would beat myself up.
172
The self often takes a covert role, but it is always there. And how much the self gains
is largely dependent on the individual and the challenging work.
You can make interesting work out of almost anything that is given to you. A person who will succeed in my opinion again is somebody who will take something and find a better way to do it, will find an attachment to it, and say well this relates to this so maybe I can get involved in this area or whatever. That's what I've tried to do you know get something as you go through. Okay, fine, but how can you branch out, what's the interesting part? And the interesting comes in two forms, it comes in a self-education, self-fulfillment of what you like, what you can learn from it and it comes from this fulfillment of this expectation of helping or being part of the company or advancing within the company.
The interesting work feeds the challenge but often it comes from the individual's own
self influence.
Commitment
It is essential to comment on commitment in the engagement construct as employees
did comment on commitment in the interviews. The two qualitative themes that
emerged were interesting work and influencers.
Interesting Work
Employees who have interesting work are going to be more committed to their jobs.
Being involved in their work and taking ownership is part of being committed.
"Being able to put my name on it" is one aspect of commitment. Employees take
pride in working on something and claiming the success. This provides the impetus to
becoming committed.
173
Development also plays a role in commitment as employees will want to stay at an
organization if there is an opportunity to grow and learn things. The employee has a
reason to engage and work harder if there is development on the job.
But commitment not only includes freedom, involvement and development but also
the contribution to the organization. One employee expressed her view that,
"Committed to the job; I think it's a feeling of being needed and you know having a
purpose." It is a feeling of completing meaningful accomplishments as employees
want and need to feel that what they are doing is worthwhile and provides to the
greater whole. It is often other people who can provide these opportunities.
Influencers
People within an organization can influence commitment whether they are
supervisors, colleagues or mentors. One employee commented on commitment, "I
think it has to do with the people though that you work with or for or for you."
Employees spend so much of their time at the job that they need to build relationships
as if they were family. This builds trust and allegiance not only among employees but
also to the organization.
Another employee commented that it is "the social aspect that keeps people
committed." If employees can interact with people outside of their department, they
can find out more information and have a better feel for the direction of a project or
the direction of the organizational goals. It also provides a path to build strong
174
relationships with others which will ultimately produces more loyalty to colleagues
and the organization.
Commitment is multi-faceted as are the overall talent management and engagement
constructs. Interesting work, climate and influencers all impact the talent management
and employee engagement constructs. The talent management drivers clearly
influence and affect employee engagement and, combined, they form a strategy that
promotes talent management and engagement together feeding into the organizational
strategy.
Talent Management Strategy
The three themes that emerged from the interviews clearly overlap each other.
Interesting work cannot exist without key influencers in an appropriate working
climate. As one senior level manager explained:
Talent management to me becomes like part of the corporate company culture. I think it has to be imbedded in there. It has to be something that somebody can look at this and say, I have a direction and I have a say and let me define a little bit about that. The direction is the help; it's not the giving. It's providing the company and managers and the people on top the ability to excel to move the people but they've got to be involved in it, too. It's not a one time direction so this year you'll be doing this and now I'll move this way. It is communication and it is direction and making these things available; that's the hard part of it. I think the helping, education, the involvement; it's difficult but it should be done. It's providing the opportunities.
Talent management is embedded in the organization and strategy. There is a
triangulation between them so that when combined together, they work in concert and
impact employee engagement and contribute to the organizational strategy.
175
Intervention Results/Findings
In order to complete the triangulation of this study, it is necessary to report the results
and findings of the interventions in support of the talent management strategy and
employee engagement concept. The results of the interventions are described based
upon observation and action plans implemented.
Supporting Interventions for the Talent Management Construct
Interventions and action plans had been implemented to promote a positive change
and focus on talent management drivers. The results of the interventions are discussed
for each talent management component.
Continuous Work Environment Improvement
In order to create change within the CSU, management supported the concept of
directly involving the employees. If the culture was going to have to change in order
to increase engagement and focus on the human resource assets, the employees were
the key to making it happen.
The management of CSU was approached with an opportunity to hold an appreciative
inquiry workshop with the purpose of exploring what kind of culture or environment
the CSU should have in order to encourage and foster employee development and
engagement. Appreciative Inquiry (AI) allows the transformation of an organization
to occur through exploration of affirmation and appreciation. Individuals can
influence success and change of an organization by focusing on strengths, values,
hopes and dreams (Whitney & Trosten-Bloom, 2003). Through an AI intervention, it
176
is possible to learn, discover and appreciate what is most effective and successful
within an individual, organization, and the "whole" system (Ludema et al., 2003).
The "whole" system at CSU, which consisted of all of the employees, was able to
work through the AI process in a two-day offsite workshop. They addressed and
completed the four phases of AI: a) Discovery, b) Dream, c) Design, and d) Destiny.
The discovery phase enabled the CSU to identify the basic principles to preserve
within the organization. These consisted of teamwork, people relationships,
opportunities to expand knowledge and develop challenges, and be a part of the
diverse, global organization. The second phase, dreaming, resulted in creating
employee development culture statements:
• CSU encourages education while promoting teamwork within the organization. It offers a work/life balance by providing a flexible work schedule while recognizing outstanding service.
• A company that listens to its employees' needs and works toward meeting them through promoting diversity, growth opportunities, mentoring and rewards for hard work.
• CSU is a fun place to learn and grow. It has programs that help employees identify their strengths and provides programs to help them build on those strengths. Management encourages employee participation with time and resources.
• CSU develops its employees by fostering an open environment that provides career opportunities via cross-training, clearly defined career paths, mentoring programs and job rotation; at the same time offers work flexibility.
• CSU is one center of excellence—advising and consulting our operating divisions (former business units) because of our highly developed, talented, educated, creative, knowledgeable employees.
The major themes that emerged included a vacancy bank, rewards, training, cross-
training, flex-time, mentoring, career paths and an open door policy. In terms of the
177
design phase, the organization listed ten brainstorming ideas of which the top five
included rewards (monetary), sabbaticals, career paths, on-site training classes and
flexibility. For the final phase, destiny, the smallest step that would have the largest
impact on the culture at CSU was in rank order: a) flexible work schedules, b)
rewards and recognition and c) improved vacancy bank. For development purposes,
employees voiced the following ranked order concerns: a) career paths, b) on-site
training, and c) cross-training. The AI process allowed the organization to move from
a deficit-based approach to a positive change mindset with lots of energy and
excitement emerging.
With flexibility as the key issue, the CSU pursued these areas with employee
participation intertwined in the process. A flexible work schedule committee was
formed with employees representing all departmental areas to develop a proposal for
alternative work schedules. The committee met over a period of four months and a
proposal was presented and accepted for implementation. It was through their voice
and business proposal that flexible schedules were formally permitted for the first
time. This supported the effort to continuously improve the work environment.
The AI process also brought together people for the first time from cross-functional
areas. Perspectives from different groups and employees were addressed and
discussed. This was a step toward opening the communications lines within the CSU
at all levels and providing an opportunity for direct input. This was confirmed when
178
management took all employees offsite for two days. This would never have been
contemplated in the past.
The CSU management recognized the need for a cultural change to address employee
needs and was implementing an on-going process through AI to encourage it.
Open Climate
The AI workshop was the first step toward promoting a more open culture and
environment at CSU. It provided an opportunity for all levels of employees to come
together to influence and build the culture for the future. Higher level employees did
not account for more say in the process. There was equal input into the culture. The
President of the CSU participated in the AI workshop as a "regular" employee and
could not override any comments or direction at the workshop. For the first time,
many employees expressed their opinions to him.
In addition, the flexible work schedules that were designed could only be
implemented in an open culture. Both employees and managers had to be able to
address issues or concerns with flexible schedules. A new element of trust emerged.
Employees were being treated as responsible adults who did not have to be routinely
monitored but rather could work independently. This was a new "culture" for
employees.
179
A vital element for both the continuous work environment and open climate was
communication. Activities toward improving the work environment or creating an
open climate could not be successful unless appropriate communications existed.
Communication/Clear Top Direction Based upon the initial survey data, communication is one area where employees
believed that they were not receiving information about the company or their
department. The CSU initiated employee communication meetings to be held three
times a year so that management members could provide updates on the direction of
the company or to communicate up-coming changes. These meetings were held
regularly every three or four months in 2006,2007 and 2008. They were held offsite
and a social hour afterwards was provided with food and drink. This capitalized on
the social networking possibilities.
One of the key drivers for communication was the ability to know what was
happening on a local as well as a global basis. The global CFO attended the CSU
annual communication meeting at the beginning of 2008 and was able to respond to
questions from employees. This was an essential meeting as two weeks prior the
company had acquired another large coatings company which would make the US
hold the largest population for CoatCo globally. It was decided that a Board of
Management member would be invited to attend a communications meeting at least
once a year as the feedback received from the employees was extremely positive.
180
This was the first opportunity for many employees to ask questions directly of a
senior level member.
The other communication chain that was enabled was through the intranet.
Employees were able to subscribe to global and US newsletters as well as have a site
locally where company announcements were stored. All supervisors and managers
were asked to distribute any announcements that they received and to hold regular
staff meetings and regular management meetings were scheduled. The simple act of
keeping employees informed would allow them to work towards department and
company goals as well as feel a part of the organization.
Survey feedback meetings were also incorporated into the communications meetings
every year. It was important to report back to the employees the results of the annual
survey and what progress was being made at the CSU.
Supporting Interventions for the Employee Engagement Construct
The interventions and action plans that had been implemented did correlate to the
employee engagement construct as a result of the talent management initiatives. The
results of the interventions are discussed for each engagement component.
Coaching Supervisor
At the CSU and within CoatCo as a whole, supervisors had not been provided any
direct training or coaching for how to be a good manager. CoatCo began to
implement global management development programs for the first time to address
181
this deficiency. These included first line supervisory programs, middle management
essential courses and executive level programs to address areas such as coaching for
employees and global strategy in a business unit.
The CSU also implemented performance management workshops for the supervisors
to learn how to consistently evaluate employees throughout the organization. Once
again, these supervisors had never been taught the skills they needed to conduct a
performance appraisal or deal with a performance issue. They also attended classes
on how to assist with the development of employees. Supervisors need to be able to
encourage and assist employees to grow and they had not learned any techniques.
Without these skills, they could not become a good coach to their employees.
Performance Development
Both the global organization and the CSU had not emphasized employee
development as part of the organizational purpose or goal and it was very evident in
terms of the survey results. There was a lot of dissatisfaction from the employee's
perception. Based upon the focus group results after the initial 2006 survey results,
the employees generally perceived employee development as taking a class or going
to a seminar. And, even this was seen as a privilege and not a "right" of all
employees. Some supervisors allowed employees to attend training while others did
not. A management meeting was held to clarify policies and practices to emphasize
consistency. All employees would be allowed to attend up to two seminars a year and
training as needed. Supervisors were encouraged to allow employees to go even
182
though they felt that there was too much work to do in the office. All groups felt the
pressure of getting the work done with too few resources but employees had to be
developed and needed to attend training or seminars as appropriate. A "trip report"
was initiated whereby the participant would provide a quick synopsis of the training
session or seminar in order to share the knowledge he/she gained. This would benefit
more than just one person and allow an opportunity to explain new ideas.
For the employee development purposes, an interactive workshop was created for all
employees to attend where the development dialog process would be explained.
Employees would also be able to begin to work on their development plan in the
workshop. Development dialog is a process that was formalized on a global basis for
employees to complete a personal development plan. It focuses on both the current
job and longer term development. An employee completes a profile with his/her
capabilities and ambitions. The employee and supervisor then have a discussion and
finalize the action plan. Employees are responsible for their career development but it
is a manager's responsibility to actively support the process. The workshop reviewed
the definition of development and then asked participants to become familiar with the
on-line tools through a "searching quiz". One tool was a career insight program that
identifies career paths for most of the common job families. It also contains a
database of job profiles. A development activity guide was also available which
provides practical ideas for on-the-job development activities to develop needed
competencies. Finally, a learning guide was available with self-help activities for
183
coaching and feedback tips. Once employees knew what tools were available, they
could begin to research and complete their own profiles. An employee could then
finish the development dialog profile and request to meet with his/her supervisor to
discuss ambitions and career opportunities. Each supervisor at CSU had also been
designated to have an objective for the year of conducting an employee development
dialog with each direct report. If these did not occur, the supervisor would not meet
his objective for the year and it would impact his management bonus.
A piece of this exercise was to formalize what other areas employees would like to
learn new skills or jobs. This planning assists supervisors with opportunities for
cross-training employees. Cross-training was one of the priorities for employees that
emerged from the AI workshop which would allow for more coverage solutions in
order for employees to attend training and seminars. As part of the supervisor's
objectives, an overall development and cross-training plan for the department had to
be created.
Once a development plan is in place, performance needs to be reviewed and
appropriately recognized. A spot award program was initiated where supervisors and
managers could reward an employee for a project or recognition of a good job at any
time. The intent was to provide the reward and recognition at the time of the action so
it could be appropriately recognized. The award could be provided in the form of
cash, a gift certificate or a lunch/dinner out. The freedom to determine the award was
184
the responsibility of the supervisor. The basic concept of the spot award allowed an
employee to be recognized and rewarded for strengths even if he/she was an
"average" performer on a performance appraisal. This accentuated the positive.
A workshop was also created for all employees to attend prior to initiating the year-
end performance evaluation in order to increase the understanding of how ratings
were established. In the workshop, employees had an opportunity to rate hypothetical
employees through case studies and to discuss why they were evaluated in certain
ways. This created an internal calibration of definitions for ratings (needs
improvement, meets expectations, exceeds expectations) as defined by employees.
Employees gained an understanding of the relationship of a rating and the
corresponding merit increase they would receive based upon the rating.
In addition, the organization recognized that it did not differentiate enough between
an employee who met expectations and exceeded expectations. A merit increase of
3.5% for an employee meeting the requirements of a job versus a 4.0% increase for a
person exceeding the requirements did not provide recognition or incentive to move
to a higher level of performance. Therefore, an additional 3-4% lump sum amount
was provided. High performers needed to be recognized and valued.
While many of these reward and recognition programs were put in place, this was one
area where little to no improvement was made. Employees continued to express that
185
there was no link between performance and pay. It is more likely that the employees
that received larger increases based on performance were more satisfied but,
generally, this would not be the majority of the employee population. The AI
workshops revealed that incentives and, specifically, monetary rewards were
important. This was a different finding than in the employee interviews.
While these interventions and programs were being implemented, the culture was
transforming to a more employee centric environment with an open and trusting
climate.
Transparent Trust
The culture of CSU had to build trust into its foundation. The building block began
with the AI workshop where employees and management sat together and shared
ideas and suggestions on an equal basis. This was often the first time that many
employees had sat and talked with many of the senior management team. Some
employees who sat with the President were thrilled to learn that he had many of the
same concerns such as development opportunities and providing more
communication.
Trust was also being initiated from a supervisor and employee relationship through
the management development programs for supervisors. They were being trained on
how to manage employees as well as their development. Employees needed to know
that they could depend on their supervisors to assist them and that supervisors could
186
trust employees to fulfill their job tasks independently as well as learn new ones.
Employees wanted to be able to learn new skills while accomplishing meaningful
work.
Meaningful Accomplishments/Challenging Work
In order to provide meaningful and challenging work, employees had to define what
they wanted in terms of challenging and meaningful work. This was revealed through
the AI workshop where employees listed cross-training, mentoring, career paths and
open communication as requirements for meaningful work. They expressed wanting
to make a contribution to their department as well as to the organization. Employees
could express their interests through the development dialog program where both the
employee and supervisor would discuss future opportunities and career paths. The
work could be geared toward an employee's strength and interest with their input.
Commitment
The AI workshop provided an opportunity for employees to think about and express
their reasons for working at the CSU in CoatCo. It was a time for reflection. The
employees expressed that it was teamwork and the people relationships that
encouraged them to stay. It was the ability to work with many different people and at
all levels. They also expressed that the development opportunities to expand their
knowledge and to be a part of a diverse, global organization were important. These
positive attributes allowed them to become or maintain committed to their job and the
CSU.
187
The development opportunities included attending workshops on performance
appraisals as well as coaching for supervisors. Employees also created development
plans for themselves. In essence, they would have control over their future career
plans with the supervisor guiding them. This committed employees to the process.
Employees could only become committed if they understood the strategic direction of
the department and company. Communications were vital for commitment for if
employees could not figure out the direction of the company, their contribution may
be in the wrong form and become meaningless. With the implementation of the
communications meetings as well as the electronic means of e-mails and websites,
employees were more readily informed and could commit to a path toward
accomplishing departmental and organizational goals.
Summary of Intervention Findings
Many of these events and interventions were occurring simultaneously but they all
had a purpose of implementing key components of a talent management strategy to
engage employees at higher levels and drive overall organizational strategy. The
results of the interventions support the components in the talent management model
and contribute to the HR/OD strategy.
Summary of Triangulation of Results and Findings
The quantitative results showed significant improvement in engagement for the CSU
employees over a two year period. The constructs that were defined for talent
management (e.g. continuous work environment improvement, open climate and
188
communications) and employee engagement (e.g. coaching supervisor, performance
development, transparent trust, meaningful accomplishments/challenging work and
commitment) were corroborated with the qualitative interview themes of interesting
work, climate and influencers as well through the interventions that occurred. When
employees discussed their views of talent management, they embodied the essential
components of the model which were communication, employee development,
managing performance, rewards and recognition and an open climate/culture. The
same applied where employees discussed the engagement model factors which
include the job is challenging and meaningful, have the resources to do the job, trust
in management, perceived support from the organization and supervisor, rewarded
and recognized, safe to act and committed to the organization. Figure 14 displays the
correlating constructs with the proposed talent management model dimensions.
189
Talent Management Model Dimensions
Communications
Employee Development "1 Managing Performance ?• Rewards & Recognition J
Open Climate/Culture
Job is challenging & meaningful
Trust in management
Perceived support from organization! Have resources to do job f-Rewarded and Recognized J
Perceived support from supervisor Safe to act
Committed to organization
}"
- >
- •
- •
- •
- •
-> •
- •
- •
Talent Management Construct
Communications, Clear Top Management Direction
Continuous Work Environment Improvement
Open Climate/Culture
Employee Engagement Construct
Meaningful Accomplishments/Challenging Work
Transparent Trust
Performance Development
Coaching Supervisor
Commitment
Figure 14. Talent Management Model Dimensions and Corresponding Talent Management and Employee Engagement Constructs
There were two areas where little progress or conflicting support occurred within this
triangulation process. One area with little support and conflicting views is rewards
and recognition. The link between pay and performance was a factor that was
evaluated in the quantitative data. It was significant in both the talent management
and employee engagement constructs. However, there was no improvement in this
area over the three year period as measured by the survey data (2006 = 3.01, 2007 =
3.05 and 2008 = 3.07 where p<.05). In the qualitative interviews, rewards and
recognition were mentioned and discussed but in the sense of non-monetary forms.
190
People described internal satisfaction and getting recognized but not wanting more
money. In the intervention and, specifically, in the AI workshop, participants
expressed looking for more monetary rewards. This conflicts between the two
constructs. I believe that part of the reason is that during the interviews, individuals
were more reluctant to discuss money or salary in a one-on-one setting where in the
AI workshop; no one is individually identified when expressing concern about pay or
money. It also begs the question of whether compensation is really a long term
satisfier. As the managers in the interviews had more seniority, it may be that
individuals, who like their jobs, find challenging work and feel treated fairly, find
money will not buy happiness. It may buy short term satisfaction but not in the long
term.
Another area within the triangulation that showed no significant improvement was
opportunities for further development in one's job. The trend value for 2006 was 2.85
and in 2007 it was 3.08 where p<.05. This may have been expected during the first
year as little could occur with many of the interventions taking place in 2007.
However, no significant changes were recoded in 2008 as well with a trend value of
3.17. The interviews with employees revealed that they certainly did value
development and encouraged more. However, in the view of the employees, it had not
occurred into 2008. Interventions may have occurred such as providing training
classes to both employees and supervisors for working on development plans, but the
goals had not been accomplished. It may be that development requires a longer term
191
to implement as managers still had until 2009 to initiate development dialogs with
their subordinates. Opportunities take time to develop.
Employees also have the responsibility for creating their own development. As was
noted by a manager, "The employee needs to have a desire to look for these
opportunities and, ask; not expect management to come to them." However, it can be
difficult if the tools to inform employees are not fully functional. A global vacancy
bank does not currently exist so open positions are not readily available on an
electronic vehicle. Communication of events or processes also has to occur so
employees can express an interest in participating. But the key factor is the
development of employees in their current jobs and looking for cross-training or
cross-functional opportunities to expand their knowledge and skills. This is an area
that will need to continue to be monitored.
Overall, the triangulation suggests that the talent management model is valid as a
means for exploring how talent management affects engagement. The scale and
reliability are valid in both the talent management and engagement constructs. The
survey data and interviews driven by the interventions confirm these constructs. What
the results also confirmed was the change within the CSU organization to one of
focusing more on employees and driving engagement toward the overall
organizational strategy and goals. This encompassed encouraging employees to learn
new skills and knowledge so that the organization can sustain it momentum forward
192
towards being the number one chemicals/coatings company in the world. It is the
employees that can make it happen when they are informed of the strategic direction
and goals, working in a culture that embraces change and open communication and,
where the focus is on continuous improvement.
Summary
This chapter focused on presenting the quantitative and qualitative results along with
the intervention impact. The next chapter will discuss the key findings of this field
research from both the theoretical and practical views of a talent management strategy
as well as the limitations of the study.
Chapter 5: Discussion
Introduction
Key findings presented thus far address what dimensions of talent management
emerged as key factors and show the correlation with employee engagement
dimensions. In this chapter, these findings will be related to the proposed theoretical
model and will discuss how talent management affects employee engagement through
both a scholar and practitioner lens. Extending from the results of the field study, two
additional key findings are included for discussion: a) talent management is a key
strategic driver of change and b) talent management strategy demonstrates that
Human Resources and Organization Development (HR/OD) is strategic.
Critical to understanding these outcomes is linking them to existing literature which
highlights the importance of an HR/OD strategy to the business as well as to the field
study. With continuous change occurring in almost every industry, effectively
managing the human resources of any business is essential. Finally, the limitations of
the study will be discussed.
Summary of Key Findings
The purpose of this study was to examine how a talent management strategy affects
employee engagement. This research exploration seeks to uncover key talent
management and employee engagement drivers and to identify the talent management
193
194
attributes that affect employee engagement. This research explores the model
utilizing both a theoretical and practitioner lens.
Three key findings emerged from this field study:
• Talent management positively affects engagement
• Talent management and employee engagement combined drives environmental
and cultural organization change
• Talent management is strategic HR/OD
From a scholar-practitioner perspective, the findings are significant. Each of these
points is discussed in detail from both theoretical and practical perspectives and
reviewed in terms of the impact on the case in this field study.
Talent Management Positively Affects Employee Engagement
A talent management strategy does positively support employee engagement in this
study. As demonstrated with the quantitative and qualitative data, engagement
increases when a talent management strategy is implemented. This concept was
explored through the use of the talent management model as described in Chapter 2.
The key drivers of talent management strategy and employee engagement are
summarized and linked back to the theory. An overall definition is discussed for both
talent management and employee engagement. The affect of the talent management
model on the CSU study is discussed.
195
Talent Management Defined and Linking the Theory
The critical drivers of a talent management strategy are three fold: a) continuous
work environment improvement; b) open climate; and c) communication. These three
components may seem simple in nature but they define talent management very
differently than much of the literature.
Talent management does not focus on placing people in the right job at the right time.
It also involves human resources and succession planning (Cheloha & Swain, 2005;
Jackson & Schuler, 1990; Kesler, 2002; Rothwell, 2000) as well as managing
performance (Buckingham & Vosburgh, 2001; McCauley & Wakefield, 2006). Talent
management includes incorporating the career anchors as described by Schein (1996).
Individuals will be at different points in their career and may need to evaluate the
appropriate resources for a particular point within their career. This means that the
culture of the organization has to be able to support a dynamic environment. What
these definitions lack is the strategic importance of working in concert in order to
contribute to the business strategy. Figure 15 presents the full dynamic picture
linking the theory with the talent management construct.
196
Organizational Strategy
OD Values Foundation
Performance
Human Potential
Participation
Development
Figure 15. Talent Management Defined Through Practice and Theory
Ashton and Morton (2005) conclude that there is no single, consistent definition;
talent management must be fluid so that as the business drivers change so does the
talent management strategy. It is true that talent management must be fluid and align
with the business goals but the concept of fluidity is the very essence of organization
development (OD) constructs. "OD 's behavioral science foundation supports values
of human potential, participation, and development in addition to performance and
competitive edge" (Cummings & Worley, 2005, p. 3). Change will occur but the OD
197
element focuses also on transferring knowledge or delegating decision-making so that
as change continues to occur, the individuals can continuously adjust accordingly.
Talent management must contain this OD element to become a strategic partner with
the business. The CSU case study provides the example of employee participation by
developing the strategy through the Appreciative Inquiry workshops so that they can
initiate the change themselves. Employees have the responsibility of participating in
their own development with the organization assisting in providing the appropriate
environment and training.
Talent management focuses on improving working conditions as well as the
communication that occurs between all levels of an organization. Supervisors and
employees of the CSU identified working conditions as a key element affecting their
ability to productively and creatively perform their jobs. Working conditions include
quality, flexibility and development. Individuals must be able to see the Big Picture
company vision in order to engage in the process of getting there. New ideas must be
accepted in an environment where mistakes are viewed as a learning experience and
not as a potential career-ending error. This is all encompassed in a facilitative
environment.
As proposed in this study, talent management is a holistic concept that incorporates
and integrates human resources and systems throughout the entire organization. It
does involve managing and developing individuals to the highest potential, but it
198
aligns itself also with the business strategy in order to sustain and produce future
growth. For this to occur, there must be an organizational culture where individuals
are comfortable to challenge the status-quo and readily accept change.
Employee Engagement Defined and Linking the Theory
Talent management strategy succeeds when employees feel connected or engaged to
their job (Lockwood, 2006). Therefore, employee engagement is critical. The key
dimensions of employee engagement identified in this field study are: a) a coaching
supervisor, b) performance development, c) transparent trust, d) meaningful
accomplishments/challenging work and, e) commitment. These attributes combine
both the academic and practitioner definitions in a more holistic approach. Figure 16
shows how the engagement theory links directly to the findings.
199
)rganizational Strategy
A )D Values f People e m P | 0 ^ / & express
Foundation Ithemselves physically] y ^- I amnftnnallu unri I n U I T i a n
Performance
Participation
(Gallup Study: Engaged _
n3X££'**/ Development _
Figure 16. Employee Engagement Defined through Practice and Theory
From an academic view, engagement is absorbing and committing one's self from a
psychological presence to individual work roles in terms of a cognitive, emotional
and behavioral stance (Kahn, 1990) as well as being motivated to perform (Salanova
et al., 2005). Engagement is not an attitude (Saks, 2006); it is the degree to which an
individual is attentive in his role. The practitioner view looks at job satisfaction and
contribution (Employee Engagement Report 2006, 2006) as well as an understanding
of the organization's goals and strategies (Debunking the Myths of Employee
200
Engagement, 2006; Measuring True Employee Engagement, 2006). Combined, these
two approaches do define engagement as determined in this study.
The definition of engagement moves beyond individual attributes and emotions. The
support an employee receives from a supervisor is significant in terms of engagement.
If the supervisor provides a coaching environment where opinions and suggestions
are taken seriously and where teamwork is encouraged, employees will be more
likely to engage. It also involves regular feedback and discussions about development
opportunities. The organization must offer resources for further career development
and engagement, and will only be successful when there is trust between the
employee and management. Being treated fairly is essential for engagement and
having meaningful accomplishments or challenging work will keep employees
engaged.
Talent Management Model
The holistic definitions and dimensions of both talent management and engagement
support the talent management model (Figure 1, Chapter 2). The model can be refined
to reflect the findings of the study as shown in Figure 17. This model is significant
from a theoretical view as well as the practitioner's perspective.
201
Figure 17. Strategic Talent Management Model
A holistic model is inherently complex but is promising from a conceptual construct.
Finding and developing the resources in an organization that will generate tacit
organizational knowledge is vital (Barney, 1991). These human resources must be
carefully chosen based upon well informed data (Boudreau & Ramstad, 1997). The
organization must also provide an appropriate culture and environment for learning in
order to sustain and move the firm forward (Lado & Wilson, 1994; Schein, 1990). It
is the human capital that will implement the HR/OD strategy that integrates with the
202
overall organizational strategy (Worley et al., 1996). By managing human capital and
aligning it with employees' values and what the company can offer, the organization
can successfully accomplish its goals (Lawler & Worley, 2006).
Impact of Results on the Field Study and the Key Findings With the first world wide employee survey administered in 2006, it was an
opportunity for the US CSU in CoatCo to determine how it was viewed from an
employee perception and what the weaknesses were that needed to be addressed. The
CSU had been an "island in a sea" as perceived by the service unit. Service units
within the global organization were often viewed differently since they were not a
business unit manufacturing a product that contributed to the bottom line. However,
senior level management did recognize the expertise that existed within service units
that provided legal, tax and other vital services in order to operate the company
efficiently and cost effectively.
The 2006 world wide survey results exhibited significantly lower talent management
and engagement scores in all categories as compared to the business units in the US.
This was a bit of a surprise to management of the CSU, and it was acknowledged that
the service unit is often treated differently than the other respective business units in
terms of focus and development. It was acknowledged also that a service unit has
more difficulty aligning itself with the overall organizational strategy since it only
indirectly affects the business goals. Clearly, talent management and engagement had
to be addressed.
203
The management team of the CSU developed and implemented action plans to
address managing performance, employee development, managing the alignment of
rewards and recognition programs and improving communications. The employees of
the CSU had never focused on themselves because they were first driven to provide
services for others. In order to change the paradigm of the CSU employees and their
perception of the service unit, the culture would have to change. A talent management
strategy could set the path toward changing the company culture and climate. This
was another key finding that emerged from the study.
Talent Management and Employee Engagement Combined Drive and Instigate Environmental and Cultural Organization Change
One of the most inherent outcomes of this study was the recognition that talent
management in concert with employee engagement is a key driver of organization
change. It is important to designate that organization change is a broad concept that
can focus on any kind of change including technical or managerial innovations.
Moreover, when it focuses on organization development change such as change
toward improved problem solving, quality of work life and/or effectiveness, it is a
significant contributor to cultural changes (Cummings & Worley, 2005).
Lockwood (2006) concurs that it is the work experience and the organizational
culture that determine employee engagement and retention. However, it is more than
the work experience and climate that encompasses talent management strategy; it
includes communication and recognition as well. It is not just about retaining
204
employees but engaging and developing them. Talent management is broader than
just retention and reaches out to instigate change.
Talent management strategy is an integral component of driving continuous change
and transition within an organization (Grossman, 2007). In this study, the CSU at
CoatCo did create a change within the working environment. Under Lawler and
Worley's (2006) Built-to-Change model, continuous change occurs and organizations
must be able to adapt and react as necessary. CoatCo is an example of continuous
change. The organization had changed its portfolio with the divestment of its
pharmaceutical division, followed by a major acquisition within the coatings industry.
The company changed its product focus and its branding strategy. As changes such as
these occur within an organization so must the talent management strategy. It is
necessary to continuously determine what type of employee best exemplifies the
skills necessary to promote growth and what type of environment or culture best
supports the goals or vision. CoatCo utilized the talent management strategy to induce
change.
The CSU in CoatCo promoted employee participation in the development of its talent
management strategy. The Appreciative Inquiry (AI) workshop allowed all of the
employees within the CSU to come together to create an appropriate environment for
a culture where employee development would be enhanced and encouraged. Schein
205
(1990) promotes a collaborative effort to produce a culture because if the ownership
of the employees is not at stake, there is no impetus to change.
During the AI workshops, employees came together for the first time to create a new
culture. The functional silos had to be knocked down. For the first time, employees of
different departments were sitting together at the same table. One participant
described the AI process as follows:
The most important thing to me was, you know, here's the outline of what we're doing and here's why and we were able to spend two days coming up with that stuff together and everybody got to participate. The groups were mixed, so I kind of got it right at the beginning because you made it clear of what was going on and I thought that was pretty exciting. I thought that was pretty neat. So I didn't have one aha moment; it was just at the beginning that, wow, this is really an opportunity for the employees, all the employees, all the people who feel neglected or all those people to maybe voice an opinion.
It was evident that some employees had felt they did not have a voice in setting the
direction of the service unit. At the AI workshop, they were listening and exchanging
ideas amongst themselves that created an atmosphere ripe for inducing change. They
wanted to provide input into the process. The results at the AI workshop created an
environment where flexibility would be allowed and actually encouraged. It was a
surprise to management that one of the highest concerns for employees was flexibility
in the work place. This concept was consistent with the survey data where the work
environment developed as a key construct within talent management and also from
employee interviews. One participant professed about what was important to her
206
within a company culture and stated, "I think it would be a dynamic environment,
something that is flexible and changes and wants to improve." The organization did
implement flexible work schedules with support from managers. Individuals could
work from home or within alternate hours of the day and still maintain service and
productivity levels. This change came from the development of the talent
management strategy and would not have been implemented otherwise; all managers
heard the voice of the employees at the AI workshops.
Employees also indicated that they wanted more communication from senior
management. This was readily emphasized through the survey results. The CSU
implemented employee communication meetings three times a year along with other
opportunities for communication such as informational e-mail blasts and establishing
websites. The CSU organization made a conscious effort to provide open
communications and encourage supervisors to be more open, to a point where it
became a subconscious practice rather than a conscious effort. One participant
described the changed environment:
But I think that it helps to have management up here who also continues to trickle that [communication] down. I think it's very open. The website, the CSU intranet, there's information about who is doing what in what country, what's going on, keeping us in the loop. I think that's good.
Communication affects how employees perceive the changes within the organization.
The more open the communication, the more positive employees react to the
207
occurring changes. They understand the end goal and why it is important for them to
participate towards achieving it.
To drive change, the skill set of the employees has to be dynamic and the
expectations for employees and managers would need to shift. Employees needed to
have the opportunity to learn new skills. In order for the CSU to support the CoatCo
world wide vision of a "talent factory", they needed to broaden and raise the level of
skills and knowledge. Barney (1986) subscribes that the resources must also be rare
and imitable. But what could be rare about service unit employee skills or
knowledge? This was the challenge for the CSU. If the standards for the organization
were going to be higher and/or sustainable, they had to be unique. If they were going
to be unique, they had to be developed by the participants themselves. Employees
would have to participate in their own development plans.
Employee development workshops and action plans were implemented for all
employees. Managers also attended workshops designed to assist them with holding
career discussions with their subordinates. After the assessment and workshops with
employees, the CSU was able to build and provide the resources and tools for
development. The CSU concentrated on providing a broader learning environment
rather than a hierarchical one. The accounting department was reorganized to focus
on individual's strengths rather than typical job positions. Employees were
encouraged to work with peers and colleagues to gain cross-training so that they
208
could have experience in multiple areas and also provide coverage during peak or
vacation times. This talent strategy changed the way the CSU addressed employee
development and the process for creating a high-level skilled employee population.
The participation and new skills of the employees would drive the world wide
business strategy of building a talent factory with high performing employees. With
these changes and a new found emphasis on the employees of the service unit, the
survey results concluded that employees were becoming more engaged at their jobs.
The engagement and talent management scores significantly increased over the two-
year period while the other US business unit scores remained constant. The CSU had
implemented a talent management strategy that increased engagement to a much
more acceptable level where employees viewed their jobs and contributions as
valuable and significant to the company.
It is interesting to note that the engagement and talent management scores did not
significantly increase above and beyond the other US business unit scores. The CSU
may not have had enough time to fully implement the interventions for a higher
impact. However, the recovery of the CSU was clearly significant in terms of its
engagement and talent management strategy. The CSU was able to turn around its
culture that is how it was valued and perceived by the employees through the talent
management action plans which included creating a new working environment,
209
improving communications and enhancing employee development programs. Future
survey analysis may be able to determine further impact.
Within this talent management strategy, it is also evident that how managers treat
employees is highly significant and, ultimately, affects organizational change. The
surveys concluded that if employees trust management or perceive support from
them, employees will be more likely to be engaged. However, the organization has to
provide the tools and resources for supervisors to become effective. The CSU began
to hold workshops and training for supervisors on skill sets such as coaching and
performance management. The vision of both the CSU and the world wide CoatCo
organization is to make supervisors accountable for employee development and
people management. This is a change from the past where supervisors were not given
any training and expected to work along side subordinates. The talent management
strategy supports and pushes this organization change by holding supervisors
accountable for guiding employees and improving skills and performance.
Organizations that focus on development of managers that align with company values
have the advantage of reaching the organizational goals quicker and more efficiently.
The CSU did take into account the workplace environment, communication and the
development of its employees and succeeded in contributing toward driving
organization developmental change. The resources, as well as the culture of an overall
organization strategy must be identified and implemented in a talent management
210
action plan. Participation by the employees is important to build the buy-in and belief
in the ultimate vision. One participant put it succinctly when he stated, "Talent
management to me becomes like part of the corporate company culture and, that I
think, has to be imbedded in there." Thus, it becomes embedded into the overall
organizational strategy. This, too, was another key finding from the research.
A Holistic Talent Management Strategy Demonstrates that HR/OD is Strategic
Talent management is an essential root of any organizational strategy. The HR/OD
function does not create a strategy after the business goals are developed, but rather,
formulates strategy and gains commitment and support for the strategy in one
integrated process. Worley et al. (1996) emphasizes this point in the Integrated
Strategic Change (ISC) model where a firm must focus on its organizational
capabilities and human resources to create and implement strategies for long-term
competitiveness. HR/OD is not only the strategic partner but is actually considered an
essential strategy for organizational success. It is the talent management process that
is responsible for selecting, developing, rewarding and providing the appropriate
communications and climate for managers and employees. A business cannot survive
or sustain success without the appropriate talent management strategy.
The question of whether HR/OD should be at the strategy table is moot. An
organization cannot sustain a business unless its employees are all working together
towards the firm's goals. HR/OD should be so ingrained into the organizational
strategy, down to the line management function that the question of whether or not
211
HR as a function can survive has to be asked. Talent management is not an HR
initiative but rather a strategy that enables an organization to achieve its vision.
Talent management is strategic. Employees must be viewed as the most valuable
asset because they are the key to organizational success.
The paradigm of HR/OD must change. HR/OD provides the assistance and tools to
create the talent management strategy but it is the organization and its managers that
must participate in the development and implementation of it. Managers and
supervisors play a key role in engaging employees by their coaching styles and
perceived trust. They must be able to provide meaningful and interesting work with
the ability to develop their employees. The heart of employee development is in the
hands of the supervisor and the management direction. For supervisors to have these
very important skills, they must also be developed and trained. HR/OD provides the
tools and guidance to ensure that the organization is moving in the right direction
knowing that the path can change. This is the strategic talent management role.
Organizations and managers alike must view employees as their most important
capital resource. Decisions regarding human resources cannot be made lightly and
without thought. They need to be able to evaluate and analyze how individuals can
support the organization's goals. In the CSU, management development goals and
workshops began to turn this paradigm around. An emphasis was culturally placed on
training and providing tools for managers to learn how to evaluate and manage
212
human resources. Senior management supported the change by incorporating it into
overall business and individual objectives. HR/OD provided the structure and process
through talent management to do this just as finance provided the tools to conduct an
asset cost analysis, but it is the managers who link the talent decisions to the business
(Boudreau & Ramstad, 2005). Without the HR/OD strategic process and perspective,
the organizational goals cannot be met.
It is clear in the CSU study that employees wanted to participate in creating an
environment ripe for change and to develop that change process. It is no mistake that
in order to engage employees, they must be involved in the process. Worley et al.
(1996) concur that without employee participation, dismal failure will ensue. In order
to involve employees, the culture must allow an open, two-way communication. The
environment must be continuously working towards improvements with input from
employees. It is the HR/OD function that permeates the strategy within the
organization to develop and encourage an appropriate culture. The AI initiative at the
CSU was an intervention that enabled an open culture to develop among all levels of
employees for the first time. Employees participated and had input in the direction of
the service unit. Management listened and implemented their ideas such as flexible
work schedules and more communication vehicles. HR/OD is the driver for the
organization development change that influences business success. The CSU can now
align its goal of viewing human resources as the most important asset with the global
213
organization. The talent management strategy enables HR/OD to strategically
integrate the overall organizational goals.
Limitations of the Study
There are acknowledged limitations within this research study. The research is an
exploratory field study of one service unit in an organization. The challenge with a
single study of one organization is providing data that is relevant to other situations.
A single case study is not generalizable, yet, as Eisenhardt (1989) states, " Perhaps, it
will help others become informed consumers of the results" (p. 549). The data and
results can stimulate other theory and research. Yin (2003) points out, it is the
multiple sources of evidence in a real-life case study that is representative or typical
that can then be learned and applied to a larger context. It does provide other
organizations a lens and tool to begin to test the basic constructs of talent
management and employee engagement in this model. The talent management
strategy explored in the study can now be investigated with other organizations and
can stimulate new theory and research.
Another limitation is the utilization of a service unit rather than a business unit. A
service unit may not have the same business strategies and bottom-line responsibility
that a business unit does. The goals are different in a service unit as functional
responsibilities evolve around budgets instead of profits. However, employees in both
214
service units and business units typically look for development opportunities in the
same manner.
The number of participants in the service unit is also a limitation. With only 109
employees in the country service unit, the sample size was relatively small. However,
the employees are representative of the US business units. By comparing the CSU to
the other US business units that are similar in demographics and background, the size
limitation has been minimized.
Survey data typically show a point in time when the behaviors or opinions that
respondents reported may or may not reflect reality. Hofstede (1991) identifies that
surveys that ask individuals to choose or comment on what they value lead to a result
that does not necessarily correspond to the way people actually behave. With a
longitudinal survey, some of this impact may be smoothed due to asking the same
questions on a consistent basis.
Hopefully, through the use of the methodology in this study, these limitations have
been reduced.
215
Summary
This chapter has provided a discussion of the key findings from the field research.
Talent management does positively affect engagement and talent management and
combined with employee engagement, drives cultural organization change. In
addition to these two findings, a significant discovery concluded that talent
management is strategic HR/OD. The limitations of the study were also discussed.
The final chapter of this research study will present a summary conclusion along with
implications for both the scholar and practitioner. It concludes with thoughts for
future research.
Chapter 6: Conclusion, Implications and Future Research
Conclusion
Talent management strategy has a direct impact on employee engagement as seen
through the talent management model lens. Talent management is a holistic concept
that must be viewed from several angles in order to truly impact strategy. What is so
vital in this strategy is that it encompasses not only the direct employee experience
(i.e. recruitment, development, and retention) but also includes the culture and
climate of the organization. The communications from senior level management to
employees and supervisors within all levels of the organization plays a significant
role. With a dynamic environment, continuous improvement in organizations
becomes a challenge. However, if the talent within an organization can adapt and
have the freedom to actually create change, organizations can move forward with
innovation and creativity.
It is the human capital within an organization that can provide this competitive
advantage and opportunity. Organizations develop strategies to grow and expand. It is
the talent of the organization that brings this to fruition. The culture and climate must
be appropriate for the organizational goals to succeed. The HR/OD function has the
responsibility for providing the tools to management and employees of an
organization in order to create the appropriate climate and communicate the
216
217
appropriate messages. The HR/OD function permeates the strategy within the
organization. Talent management is strategic HR/OD.
This is not recognized in many organizations today, as the holistic concept has not
been fully explored. Talent management strategy is embedded within organizational
strategy and until this concept is recognized, companies will continue to miss
opportunities for improved performance and success. The organizations that do
recognize human capital as their most valuable asset will have a competitive edge;
those organizations that view talent management as strategic HR/OD, integrated with
the overall organization strategy, will find higher levels of success and sustainability
for the future.
Implications
There are implications from this research for both the scholar and the practitioner.
From a theoretical stance, the holistic talent management model shows significance as
measured by the triangulation of the quantitative, qualitative and applied longitudinal
intervention results. As a result, it provides operational definitions for talent
management and employee engagement based upon theory that can be applied to
future studies. There is limited academic literature on talent management and this
study provides a foundational base for the academic study of talent management.
218
Theory is often developed but not always explored. From a scholar's perspective, this
talent management model is built upon literature and previous theory that provides for
the inclusion of talent management and engagement strategies. However, it bridges
the gap from theory to practitioner by applying the field study. From a practitioner's
perspective, it is the affect on practice that weighs positively.
Talent management theory is a luxury that practitioners do not have time to study.
Practitioners need to be able to apply a strategy and see positive results quickly. The
talent management model demonstrates that it is significant through the field study
and can be positively applied in an organization. A holistic model may seem complex
to a practitioner but is worth the effort when employee engagement is increased and
produces results that apply to the overall organizational goals.
The talent management model applies to employees, human resource professionals, as
well as to leaders of an organization. From an employee perspective, a talent
management strategy that promotes an open climate, clear communication and an
environment of learning and improvement will engage employees on a higher level to
support the company's mission and goals. Employees will feel fulfilled and also
receive personal as well as career development that will enhance their skills and
knowledge. Commitment to the organization improves with engagement and the
employee will find more opportunity within the company.
219
Human resource professionals will now have a model that has been explored with
"real world" data. Exploring what actually works through a field study approach
provides confirmation of theory and strategies that have successfully been applied. It
offers a framework to build company specific talent management strategy. It is not
necessary for HR professionals to try to guess what might work for an organization.
In addition, confirmation of theory provides HR professionals the opportunity to
successfully contribute to the overall company strategy.
Finally, the leadership of any organization will benefit from this holistic talent
management model as it explains the various dimensions that contribute to both the
success of a manager and organizational strategy. It identifies the attributes important
for an employee to be engaged. Through these constructs, leaders can identify ways
to build trust, promote positive supervisory skills, and provide challenging work that
includes development aspects for all employees. These are the areas where senior
level management needs to ensure they have programs in place to educate supervisors
and provides support toward the company's overall goals.
Practitioners can view this model through a new paradigm. Talent management is not
just about recruiting, retaining and deploying employees. It is a strategy to contribute
to the overall organizational goals with positive outcomes and utilizing the
company's most valuable resources. It may mean changes have to occur through this
220
shift in paradigm, but with a talent management strategy, change can be accelerated
with positive outcomes.
Future Research
The approach with this field study is to bridge the theory and practical views together.
It provides the basis for further testing and exploration with other organizations as
well. This study does bring both the theoretical and practical implications together.
For scholars, it confirms that talent management does affect engagement and, for
practitioners, it provides a model with which to create a talent management strategy.
It needs to be applied further to similar organizations and explored in other types of
industries as well as in larger groups.
This research could also stimulate further theory. The model could be tested in a
business unit to review and test the impact on engagement and on organizational
effectiveness. Did the profits and productivity increase after implementation of a
talent management strategy?
Further research could explore how rewards and recognition relate to talent
management and engagement. Do monetary and/or non-monetary rewards enhance
engagement? Each dimension could be individually studied for its affect on talent
management and engagement.
221
Contributions of this Study
If organizations truly believe that people are their most valuable asset, a talent
management strategy must be in place as part of the overall organization strategy to
initiate and sustain the success of a company. Employee engagement cannot occur
until the appropriate talent initiatives are identified and implemented. The talent
management constructs include a working environment that encourages continuous
improvement, an open climate and clear communication from management. If this
occurs, employees will engage where a job is challenging with meaningful
accomplishments, there is trust in management, the supervisor serves as a coach, and
employee development is promoted.
This study does not provide support for a direct cause-effect relationship but rather
urges a more critical review of research-based inquiries into talent management and
employee engagement. As the results of this study suggest, a talent management
strategy does positively affect employee engagement. Talent management can drive
change where needed in a continuously changing business environment in order to
achieve the business goals when it is embedded within the organizational strategy.
HR/OD is the strategic force to promote this strategy throughout the entire
organization.
Appendix A: Timeline for CSU Study
First worldwide Employee Survey
Receive survey
Results back for
CSU
Employee Communication
Meeting Feedback results
Employee Focus Groups were held to gain additional
info on survey results
Mgmt Team meets to discuss next
steps to address issues in employee
survey
Mgmt Team meets to finalize
recommendations for President
May, 2006 September, 2006 October 9, 2006 Nov. 13-17, 2006 Nov. 15, 2006 Dec 11,2006
Mgmt team meets Communications with President Meeting with
to finalize Group - Recap Recommendations On employee
For employee survey survey and how recommendations concems/spot awards addressing issues
Mgmt team meets With President
to discuss
2007 Pulse
Survey conducted
CSU conducts follow-up survey
Appreciative Employee Inquiry
Communications workshops Meeting held offsite
Dec. 13, 2006 Feb. 19, 2007 March 19, 2007 May/June, 2007 Jun 27, 2007 Aug 7, 2007 Aug 27&28, 2007
Summary of results Mgr Meeting Mgr Meeting of Al workshops held to
held to sent out to all discuss EE Second discuss participants/ call for development First flexible flexible
outcomes of volunteers to work and schedule schedule Al workshops on flexiDle schedule performance committee committee
committee management meeting meeting
Employee Workshops
on Performance
Mgmt and Development
Third Fourth flexible Flexible
schedule Schedule meeting Meeting
Sept. 24, 2007 Sept. 26, 2007 Oct. 11, 2007 Nov. 11, 2007 Nov. 12, 2007 Nov. 12,19 Dec. 12, 2007 Dec. 18, 2007 & 30, 2007
222
223
Acquisition of new
company
CFO and future
BOM visits CSU and holds EE meeting
US Mgmt Committee Mtg -Announcement of
MD Programs to be rolled out
President Is sent to
acquisition site
to oversee integration
Calibration Meeting Held for
Mgmt Team First time to
discuss Performance
Fifth flexible
Schedule meeting
Manager Mtg held to discuss 2008 P&D objectives. AIIEE&& Mgrs will have Development Dialog goal. Also discussed flexible work schedules. Await proposal from committee. Will initiate Rewards/recognition committee 3rd qtr
Jan 2, 2008 Jan 10, 2008 Jan 11, 2008 Jan 14, 2008 Feb 1,2008 Feb 26, 2008 March 11, 2008
Flexible Work Schedule
survey Sent to
employees For input
Development Dialog
CSU Communications To discuss
Sixth flexible Schedule meeting Development
2008 Pulse
Engagement
Workshop " M e e , i n g " su^ey7es~uits Wo^shops c o ^ X L
Flexible Schedule
Committee 2008 Presents CSU proposal Engagement
to Survey Mgmt Team Conducted
Mar 31, 2008
Flexible Schedule Proposal Sent to
President
April 8, 2008
Flexible Work
Schedule Proposal Approved
April 14,2008 April 17,
Rewards & Recognition
Initiative approved; Research
begins
2008 April 29 & 30 2008
Flexible Work
Schedule EE
Meetings
May 1,2008
Mgmt team Staff Meeting
May 6, 2008 May 27, 2008
Flexible Schedule CSU
Policy Communications Becomes Meeting effective
May 31, 2008 June 5, 2008 June 6, 2008 June 17, 24 & 25, 2008 June 30, 2008 July 7, 2008 Sept. 11,2008
Appendix B: Survey Questionnaires
2006 Employee Survey Questionnaire Employee World-wide Survey Questions (Electronic)
• Choose only one answer for each question - the one that best fits your opinion.
• Do not spend a lot of time on each question. If you don't know how to respond to a question or do not have an opinion on a question, either mark "Don't Know/Not applicable" or skip that question.
• No one at the Company or any of its Business Units will see any individual completed survey. You responses will remain confidential.
Term/Definitions When answering the survey questions, please consider the following:
• "Company Name" refers to the company of which your Business Unit/Service Unit is a part.
• "My business unit/service unit" is the organization you and your department are part of.
• "My department" refers to the immediate department or team that you work with on a day-to-day basis.
• "My immediate supervisor" refers to the person to whom you report directly and who does your annual performance appraisal (P&D Dialog).
Survey Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statement: Indicate ONE answer for each line across.
224
225
Commitment to Values
1. My immediate supervisor is open and honest with me. 2. Within my department, we take action if the company's business Principles are challenged or violated. 3. My BU/Service Unit acts socially responsible in the community where I work. 4. My Business Unit/Service Unit acts socially responsible in the community where I work. 5. In my Business Unit/Service, we practice what we preach.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Customer Focus
6. We know who our most important customers are. 7. We work to understand our customer's needs. 8. We act on customer complaints. 9. We constantly look for better ways to serve our customers. 10. We objectively measure customer satisfaction.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
226
Developing Others
11. My immediate supervisor delegates responsibility to me. 12. My immediate supervisor discusses my future career with me. 13.1 have opportunities for further development within my current job. 14.1 see clear opportunities for my next job. 15. My organization offers the support and resources I need for my development.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Innovation
16.1 am encouraged to be innovative on the job. 17. Within my department we search for new ways to work and do business. 18. Within my department new ideas are effectively implemented. 19. Within my department generating new ideas is recognized. 20. My Business Unit/Service Unit provides innovative products and services.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
227
Managing Performance
21. My immediate supervisor sets ambitious objectives for my department. 22. My immediate supervisor clearly explains how my performance is evaluated. 23. My immediate supervisor gives me regular feedback on my performance. 24. My immediate supervisor is a good coach for me. 25. There is a clear link between my performance and pay.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Quality Commitment
26. Where I work, we take appropriate measures to protect the environment. 27. Within my department we ensure employee safety. 28. Within my department we continually work to improve working conditions. 29. Within my department we learn from our mistakes. 30. Within my department we recognize efforts to improve quality.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
228
Results Orientation
31.1 understand the goals of my department. 32.1 understand how my personal objectives support my department's goals. 33. My department produces results that exceed expectations. 34. My department acts with great urgency where change is required. 35. Senior management gives employees a clear picture of the direction the company is headed.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Stimulating Open Climate
36. My immediate supervisor asks for opinions and suggestions from employees. 37. Within my department people can challenge the present way of doing things. 38. Within my department we value diversity in our employees. 39. We have adopted ideas from people outside my department. 40. My Business Unit/Service Unit keeps employees informed about matters affecting us.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
229
Teamwork
41. My immediate supervisor encourages teamwork. 42.1 have shared my personal objectives with my colleagues. 43.1 understand the influence my job has on the work of others. 44. Within my department we work effectively as a team. 45. Within my department we look proactively for opportunities to cooperate with others.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Engagement
46.1 get a feeling of personal accomplishment from my work. 47.1 am satisfied overall with my Business Unit/Service Unit as a place to work. 48.1 would recommend my Business Unit/Service Unit to others as a good place to work. 49.1 will not leave the Company or the planned new company in the near future. 50.1 am proud to be a part of my Business Unit/Service Unit. 51.1 am proud to be part of the Company.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
230
Other
52.1 am confident management will act on the results of this survey.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Background question • Supervisor (Yes/No) • Department • Country
Thank You Very Much For Your Participation!
231
2007 Employee Pulse Survey Questionnaire Employee Pulse Survey Questions (Electronic)
• Choose only one answer for each question - the one that best fits your opinion.
• Do not spend a lot of time on each question. If you don't know how to respond to a question or do not have an opinion on a question, either mark "Don't Know/Not applicable" or skip that question.
• No one at the Company or any of its Business Units will see any individual completed survey. You responses will remain confidential.
Term/Definitions When answering the survey questions, please consider the following:
• "Company Name" refers to the company of which your Business Unit/Service Unit is a part.
• "My business unit/service unit" is the organization you and your department are part of.
• "My department" refers to the immediate department or team that you work with on a day-to-day basis.
• "My immediate supervisor" refers to the person to whom you report directly and who does your annual performance appraisal (P&D Dialog).
Survey Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statement: Indicate ONE answer for each line across.
Commitment to Values
232
1. My immediate supervisor is open and honest with me. 2. Within my department, we take action if the company's business Principles are challenged or violated. 3. My BU/Service Unit acts socially responsible in the community where I work. 4. My Business Unit/Service Unit acts socially responsible in the community where I work. 5. In my Business Unit/Service, we practice what we preach.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Customer Focus
6. We know who our most important customers are. 7. We work to understand our customer's needs. 8. We act on customer complaints. 9. We constantly look for better ways to serve our customers. 10. We objectively measure customer satisfaction.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
233
Developing Others
11. My immediate supervisor delegates responsibility to me. 12. My immediate supervisor discusses my future career with me. 13.1 have opportunities for further development within my current job. 14.1 see clear opportunities for my next job. 15. My organization offers the support and resources I need for my development.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Innovation
16.1 am encouraged to be innovative on the job. 17. Within my department we search for new ways to work and do business. 18. Within my department new ideas are effectively implemented. 19. Within my department generating new ideas is recognized. 20. My Business Unit/Service Unit provides innovative products and services.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
234
Managing Performance
21. My immediate supervisor sets ambitious objectives for my department. 22. My immediate supervisor clearly explains how my performance is evaluated. 23. My immediate supervisor gives me regular feedback on my performance. 24. My immediate supervisor is a good coach for me. 25. There is a clear link between my performance and pay.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Quality Commitment
26. Where I work, we take appropriate measures to protect the environment. 27. Within my department we ensure employee safety. 28. Within my department we continually work to improve working conditions. 29. Within my department we learn from our mistakes. 30. Within my department we recognize efforts to improve quality.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
235
Results Orientation
31.1 understand the goals of my department. 32.1 understand how my personal objectives support my department's goals. 33. My department produces results that exceed expectations. 34. My department acts with great urgency where change is required. 35. Senior management gives employees a clear picture of the direction the company is headed.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Stimulating Open Climate
36. My immediate supervisor asks for opinions and suggestions from employees. 37. Within my department people can challenge the present way of doing things. 38. Within my department we value diversity in our employees. 39. We have adopted ideas from people outside my department. 40. My Business Unit/Service Unit keeps employees informed about matters affecting us.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
236
Teamwork
41. My immediate supervisor encourages teamwork. 42.1 have shared my personal objectives with my colleagues. 43.1 understand the influence my job has on the work of others. 44. Within my department we work effectively as a team. 45. Within my department we look proactively for opportunities to cooperate with others.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Engagement
46.1 get a feeling of personal accomplishment from my work. 47.1 am satisfied overall with my Business Unit/Service Unit as a place to work. 48.1 would recommend my Business Unit/Service Unit to others as a good place to work. 49.1 will not leave the Company or the planned new company in the near future. 50.1 am proud to be a part of my Business Unit/Service Unit. 51.1 am proud to be part of the Company.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
237
Health & Safety Environment
52. My immediate supervisor frequently communicates HSE issues with my department. 53. In my department we receive adequate training and instructions on HSE matters. 54.1 can influence the HSE performance in my workplace. 55. In my department, we have a strong commitment to improve HSE performance. 56. In my department, good HSE performance is recognized.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Other
57.1 am confident management will act on the results of this survey.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
58.1 have attended a feedback meeting with our department on the 2006 Employee Survey. 59. We are following an action plan from the 2006 Employee Survey.
Yes No
Background questions • Supervisor (Yes/No) • Department • Country • Female/Male • Length of time employed at CoatCo
Thank You Very Much For Your Participation!
238
2008 Employee Pulse Survey Questionnaire Employee Pulse Survey Questions (Electronic)
• Choose only one answer for each question - the one that best fits your opinion.
• Do not spend a lot of time on each question. If you don't know how to respond to a question or do not have an opinion on a question, either mark "Don't Know/Not applicable" or skip that question.
• No one at the Company or any of its Business Units will see any individual completed survey. You responses will remain confidential.
Pulse Survey Glossary P&D Dialog - Performance & Development Dialog (Performance Review) Company X - Name of company conducting the survey BU - Business unit Business Principles - Code of Conduct HSE - Health, Safety and the Environment (i.e., SHE) Q60 and 61 - Employees of the company just acquired need not complete Questions 60 and 61 since these relate back to the previous CoatCo global surveys
Term/Definitions When answering the survey questions, please consider the following:
• "Company Name" refers to the company of which your Business Unit/Service Unit is a part.
• "My business unit/service unit" is the organization you and your department are part of.
• "My department" refers to the immediate department or team that you work with on a day-to-day basis.
• "My immediate supervisor" refers to the person to whom you report directly and who does your annual performance appraisal (P&D Dialog).
Survey Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statement: Indicate ONE answer for each line across.
Commitment to Values
239
1. My immediate supervisor is open and honest with me. 2. Within my department, we take action if the company's business Principles are challenged or violated. 3. My BU/Service Unit acts socially responsible in the community where I work. 4. My Business Unit/Service Unit acts socially responsible in the community where I work. 5. In my Business Unit/Service, we practice what we preach.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Customer Focus
6. We know who our most important customers are. 7. We work to understand our customer's needs. 8. We act on customer complaints. 9. We constantly look for better ways to serve our customers. 10. We objectively measure customer satisfaction.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
240
Developing Others
11. My immediate supervisor delegates responsibility to me. 12. My immediate supervisor discusses my future career with me. 13.1 have opportunities for further development within my current job. 14.1 see clear opportunities for my next job. 15. My organization offers the support and resources I need for my development.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Innovation
16.1 am encouraged to be innovative on the job. 17. Within my department we search for new ways to work and do business. 18. Within my department new ideas are effectively implemented. 19. Within my department generating new ideas is recognized. 20. My Business Unit/Service Unit provides innovative products and services.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
241
Managing Performance
21. My immediate supervisor sets ambitious objectives for my department. 22. My immediate supervisor clearly explains how my performance is evaluated. 23. My immediate supervisor gives me regular feedback on my performance. 24. My immediate supervisor is a good coach for me. 25. There is a clear link between my performance and pay.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Quality Commitment
26. Where I work, we take appropriate measures to protect the environment. 27. Within my department we ensure employee safety. 28. Within my department we continually work to improve working conditions. 29. Within my department we learn from our mistakes. 30. Within my department we recognize efforts to improve quality.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
242
Results Orientation
31.1 understand the goals of my department. 32.1 understand how my personal objectives support my department's goals. 33. My department produces results that exceed expectations. 34. My department acts with great urgency where change is required. 35. Senior management gives employees a clear picture of the direction the company is headed.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Stimulating Open Climate
36. My immediate supervisor asks for opinions and suggestions from employees. 37. Within my department people can challenge the present way of doing things. 38. Within my department we value diversity in our employees. 39. We have adopted ideas from people outside my department. 40. My Business Unit/Service Unit keeps employees informed about matters affecting us.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
243
Teamwork
41. My immediate supervisor encourages teamwork. 42.1 have shared my personal objectives with my colleagues. 43.1 understand the influence my job has on the work of others. 44. Within my department we work effectively as a team. 45. Within my department we look proactively for opportunities to cooperate with others.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Engagement
46.1 get a feeling of personal accomplishment from my work. 47.1 am satisfied overall with my Business Unit/Service Unit as a place to work. 48.1 would recommend my Business Unit/Service Unit to others as a good place to work. 49.1 will not leave the Company or the planned new company in the near future. 50.1 am proud to be a part of my Business Unit/Service Unit. 51.1 am proud to be part of the Company.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
244
Health & Safety Environment
52. My immediate supervisor frequently communicates HSE issues with my department. 53. In my department we receive adequate training and instructions on HSE matters. 54.1 can influence the HSE performance in my workplace. 55. In my department, we have a strong commitment to improve HSE performance. 56. In my department, good HSE performance is recognized.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Other
57. The Code of Conduct has been adequately communicated to me by CoatCo. 58.1 am familiar with the complaints procedure within CoatCo to report violations of the Code of Conduct. 59.1 am confident management will act on the results of this survey.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
245
Q60 and 61 - Employees of the acquisition need not complete Questions 60 and 61 since these relate back to previous CoatCo global surveys
60.1 have attended a feedback meeting with our department on the 2006 Employee Survey. 61. We are following an action plan from the 2006 Employee Survey.
Yes No
Background questions • Supervisor (Yes/No) • Department • Country • Female/Male • Length of time employed at CoatCo
Thank You Very Much For Your Participation!
2007 CSU Employee Pulse Survey Questionnaire
Employee Service Unit (ANI) 2007 Survey Questions
• Choose only one answer for each question - the one that best fits your opinion.
• Do not spend a lot of time on each question. No one at the Company will see any individual completed survey. You responses will remain confidential.
Term/Definitions When answering the survey questions, please consider the following:
• "Company Name" refers to the company of which your Service Unit is a part. • "My service unit" is the organization you and your department are part of. • "My department" refers to the immediate department or team that you work
with on a day-to-day basis. • "My immediate supervisor" refers to the person to whom you report directly
and who does your annual performance appraisal (P&D Dialog).
Survey Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statement: Indicate ONE answer for each line across.
246
Company Direction
1.1 am proud to be a part of the Company. 2. Senior management of the worldwide organization provides a clear picture of the direction the company is headed. 3. Senior management of my Service Unit provides a clear picture of the direction the company is headed.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Performance
4.1 understand how my personal objectives support my department's goals. 5. Within my department, generating new ideas is encouraged and recognized. 6. My immediate supervisor gives me regular feedback on my performance. 7. My immediate supervisor explains how my performance is evaluated. 8. Appropriate rewards and recognition are provided for my performance. 9. There is a clear link between my performance and pay.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
247
Development
10. My immediate supervisor discusses future opportunities with me. 11. My immediate supervisor delegates responsibility to me. 12.1 have opportunities for further development within my job. 13.1 see opportunities for my next job. 14. My organization offers the support and resources I need for development.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Communications
15. Management of the worldwide organization keeps employees informed about matters affecting us. 16. Management of the Service Unit keeps employees informed about matters affecting us. 17. My manager keeps me informed about matters affecting me.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
248
Engagement
18.1 am satisfied overall with my Service Unit as a good place to work. 19.1 am proud to be a part of this Service Unit
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Other
20. Management acted upon the results of the last employee survey. 21.1 am confident that management will act on the results of this survey.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
We appreciate your time with completing this survey. Thank you!
2008 CSU Employee Pulse Survey Questionnaire Employee Pulse Survey Questions (Electronic)
Introduction We would like to encourage you to complete this employee survey for CSU. This is your opportunity to share your thoughts about management and the company. The survey is a follow-up to the last employee survey and will inform us as to the status and progress made since then.
This survey should not take you ore than 15 minutes to complete. Please keep in mind that all responses are confidential. Please only answer once for each question.
We appreciate your time and input as we seek to continue to further improve CSU.
About yourself: The following questions ask about your gender, length of service, etc. This will allow us to determine if different groups are answering questions in different ways.
249
If you feel uncomfortable answering any of these questions, simply leave them blank and go to the next section.
1. Gender i. Male
ii. Female 2. How long have you been employed by CSU?
i. <1 year ii. 1 -5 years
iii. 6 - 1 0 years iv. 11-20 years v. 20+ years
3. Are you a supervisor? i. Yes
ii. No
For the following sections, please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements:
Commitment to Values
1. My immediate supervisor is open and honest with me. 2. Within my department, we take action if the company's business Principles are challenged or violated. 3. My BU/Service Unit acts socially responsible in the community where I work. 4. My Business Unit/Service Unit acts socially responsible in the community where I work. 5. In my Business Unit/Service, we practice what we preach.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
250
Customer Focus
6. We know who our most important customers are. 7. We work to understand our customer's needs. 8. We act on customer complaints. 9. We constantly look for better ways to serve our customers. 10. We objectively measure customer satisfaction.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Developing Others
11. My immediate supervisor delegates responsibility to me. 12. My immediate supervisor discusses my future career with me. 13.1 have opportunities for further development within my current job. 14.1 see clear opportunities for my next job. 15. My organization offers the support and resources I need for my development.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
251
Innovation
16.1 am encouraged to be innovative on the job. 17. Within my department we search for new ways to work and do business. 18. Within my department new ideas are effectively implemented. 19. Within my department generating new ideas is recognized. 20. My Business Unit/Service Unit provides innovative products and services.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Managing Performance
21. My immediate supervisor sets ambitious objectives for my department. 22. My immediate supervisor clearly explains how my performance is evaluated. 23. My immediate supervisor gives me regular feedback on my performance. 24. My immediate supervisor is a good coach for me. 25. There is a clear link between my performance and pay.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
252
Quality Commitment
26. Where I work, we take appropriate measures to protect the environment. 27. Within my department we ensure employee safety. 28. Within my department we continually work to improve working conditions. 29. Within my department we learn from our mistakes. 30. Within my department we recognize efforts to improve quality.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Results Orientation
31.1 understand the goals of my department. 32.1 understand how my personal objectives support my department's goals. 33. My department produces results that exceed expectations. 34. My department acts with great urgency where change is required. 35. Senior management gives employees a clear picture of the direction the company is headed.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
253
Stimulating Open Climate
36. My immediate supervisor asks for opinions and suggestions from employees. 37. Within my department people can challenge the present way of doing things. 38. Within my department we value diversity in our employees. 39. We have adopted ideas from people outside my department. 40. My Business Unit/Service Unit keeps employees informed about matters affecting us.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Teamwork
41. My immediate supervisor encourages teamwork. 42.1 have shared my personal objectives with my colleagues. 43.1 understand the influence my job has on the work of others. 44. Within my department we work effectively as a team. 45. Within my department we look proactively for opportunities to cooperate with others.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
254
Engagement
46.1 get a feeling of personal accomplishment from my work. 47.1 am satisfied overall with my Business Unit/Service Unit as a place to work. 48.1 would recommend my Business Unit/Service Unit to others as a good place to work. 49.1 will not leave the Company or the planned new company in the near future. 50.1 am proud to be a part of my Business Unit/Service Unit. 51.1 am proud to be part of the Company.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
Other
52.1 am confident management will act on the results of this survey.
Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Don't Know/Not Applicable
53.1 have attended a feedback meeting with my department on the previous Employee Survey. 61. My department is following an action plan from the previous Employee Survey.
Yes No
Thank You For Your Participation!
Appendix C: Interview Questionnaires
Interview Guide I
Research Question
How does a talent management strategy affect employee engagement?
Interview Guide
I. Introduction:
• I am working on a research project for school that encompasses looking at what the company is doing to enhance the skills of employees and to encourage them to want to work hard at their job. As you are aware, our organization has emphasized that employee development is an essential component of our company's focus so I would like to get your views on how you feel the company is assisting you to develop your skills and career path. I am trying to understand how the company can best help you the employee/manager learn new skills to want to continue to work here.
• I am looking at these perspectives from different levels within the company and I know that you have participated in past workshops and contributed valuable information. So, I am pleased that you are willing to speak to me today.
• Your answers will remain anonymous and I will not identify them to anyone within our organization. I intend on using the information you provide me to guide my studies in terms of learning how organizations can use employee development to gain better employee commitment and engagement.
• There is no right or wrong answer. • After our interview or at any time, you may review the notes that I am
taking to ensure accuracy and clarity.
II. What is employee development to you?
255
256
o Can you describe a time that you feel best explains how and when you experienced employee development at this company? (If none, at another place of employment?)
o Can you describe the attributes? o What type of employee development have you had at here? At
other places?
III. What makes you want to work at our company?
o Can you describe what you like best here? o What do you dislike?
IV. After attending the recent P&D Dialog workshop, could you describe what you learned as you went through the session?
o What was helpful about the session? o What was not so useful?
V. Have you seen any changes in terms of how this company treats employees over the past year or so?
o If yes, can you tell me about the changes you have seen? Provide some examples?
o If not, what has remained the same? Provide some examples. o If you could find the "perfect" company to work for, what
would it look like? o What would attract you? o What would keep you there?
VI. Conclusion: You've been great responding to my inquiries today. I really appreciate the time you spent speaking with me. As I go through my notes, would you mind if I came back to you if I need to clarify or follow-up on a response? Thanks again.
257
Interview Guide II
Research Question
How does a talent management strategy affect employee engagement?
Interview Guide
I. Introduction:
• I am working on a research project for school that encompasses looking at what the company is doing to enhance the skills of employees and to encourage them to want to work hard at their job. As you are aware, our organization has emphasized that employee development is an essential component of our company's focus so I would like to get your views on how you feel the company is assisting you to develop your skills and career path. I am trying to understand how the company can best help you the employee/manager learn new skills to want to continue to work here.
• I am looking at these perspectives from different levels within the company and I know that you have participated in past workshops and contributed valuable information. So, I am pleased that you are willing to speak to me today.
• Your answers will remain anonymous and I will not identify them to anyone within our organization. I intend on using the information you provide me to guide my studies in terms of learning how organizations can use employee development to gain better employee commitment and engagement.
• There is no right or wrong answer. • After our interview or at any time, you may review the notes that I am
taking to ensure accuracy and clarity.
VII. You and the Company What makes you want to work at here? Can you describe an experience or a situation that you have been involved in that exemplifies what you like best about it? Tell me about a time when you felt so good about working at the company and you thought to yourself, this is a great place to work.
a. Who was involved and what did they do to make it so good?
258
b. Can you describe to me a time when you were not so happy here? How did you feel?
VIII. You and Employee Development Can you tell me about a time that you feel best explains when you experienced a great employee development scenario at the company? When you had that "aha" moment of this is what it's all about? (If none, think of another place of employment).
a. What was it that made it so good? b. Who else was involved and what was it about them that made this a
great experience? How did he/she contribute to this development? i. Describe what a caring manager or mentor is.
c. How did you feel? d. Think about other types of employee development you have
experienced here or someone else. Can you tell me about what you experienced?
IX. You and Your Own Development As you think about your own development at the company (or elsewhere) describe for me what you consider to be "interesting work."
a. What does it look it? b. How does it make you feel? c. What is "enthusiastic work?" How does it differ from interesting
work?
X. Overall, if you were to think about the various dimensions of talent management, what would you describe as key factors to be considered? Can you describe them to me?
a. Are some more important than others or weigh heavier in terms of what matters most to you as an employee?
i. Influencers ii. Interesting Work
iii. Climate
259
XL Conclusion: You've been great responding to my inquiries today. I really appreciate the time you spent speaking with me. As I go through my notes, would you mind if I came back to you if I need to clarify or follow-up on a response? Thanks again.
Interview Guide III
Research Question
How does a talent management strategy affect employee engagement?
Interview Guide
I. Introduction:
• I am working on a research project for school that encompasses looking at what the company is doing to enhance the skills of employees and to encourage them to want to work hard at their job. As you are aware, our organization has emphasized that employee development is an essential component of our company's focus so I would like to get your views on how you feel the company is assisting you to develop your skills and career path. I am trying to understand how the company can best help you the employee/manager learn new skills to want to continue to work here.
• I am looking at these perspectives from different levels within the company and I know that you have participated in past workshops and contributed valuable information. So, I am pleased that you are willing to speak to me today.
• Your answers will remain anonymous and I will not identify them to anyone within our organization. I intend on using the information you provide me to guide my studies in terms of learning how organizations can use employee development to gain better employee commitment and engagement.
• There is no right or wrong answer. • After our interview or at any time, you may review the notes that I am
taking to ensure accuracy and clarity.
II. You and the Company What makes you want to work at here? Can you describe an experience or a situation that you have been involved in that exemplifies what you like
260
best about it? Tell me about a time when you felt so good about working at the company and you thought to yourself, this is a great place to work.
a. Who was involved and what did they do to make it so good? b. Can you describe to me a time when you were not so happy here? How
did you feel?
You and Employee Development Can you tell me about a time that you feel best explains when you experienced a great employee development scenario at the company? When you had that "aha" moment of this is what it's all about? (If none, think of another place of employment).
a. What was it that made it so good? b. Who else was involved and what was it about them that made this a
great experience? How did he/she contribute to this development? i. Describe what a caring manager or mentor is.
c. How did you feel? d. Think about other types of employee development you have
experienced here or someone else. Can you tell me about what you experienced?
You and Your Own Development As you think about your own development at the company (or elsewhere) describe for me what you consider to be "interesting work."
a. What does it look it? b. How does it make you feel? c. What is "enthusiastic work?" How does it differ from interesting
work?
Describe what think are the key factors that make you feel committed to your job?
a. Now think about our service unit as an organization. What are the key factors that make you feel committed to the CSU? (Are they different than to your job?)
b. Are some factors more important than others or weigh heavier in terms of what matters most to you as an employee?
261
i. Influencers ii. Interesting Work
iii. Climate
XIV. You and the Company Over the Past Year Think back a year or so about the company and the global company as whole and how it views and treats its employees. Can you describe to me a time when you experienced a positive change and thought this is really the direction that we should be going?
a. Describe to me what changed. b. In a perfect world, describe for me the "perfect" company that you
would want to work for. i. What attracts you to it?
ii. What would keep you there?
XV. Conclusion: You've been great responding to my inquiries today. I really appreciate the time you spent speaking with me. As I go through my notes, would you mind if I came back to you if I need to clarify or follow-up on a response? Thanks again.
Appendix D: Supplemental Statistical Data
Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) for Engagement Construct Supervisor = 2
Multivariate Tests0
Effect
Intercept
Year
Sample
Year*
Sample
Pillai's Trace
Wilks' Lambda
Hotelling's Trace
Roy's Largest Root
Pillai's Trace
Wilks' Lambda
Hotelling's Trace
Roy's Largest Root
Pillai's Trace
Wilks' Lambda
Hotelling's Trace
Roy's Largest Root
Pillai's Trace
Wilks' Lambda
Hotelling's Trace
Roy's Largest Root
a. Exact statistic
b. Computed using alpha = .05
Value
.762
.238
3.200
3.200
.078
.922
.085
.085
.075
.925
.081
.081
.080
.920
.086
.086
c. Design: Intercept + Year + Sample + Year'
F
1.307E33
1.307E33
1.307E33
1.307E33
34.652a
34.652a
34.652a
34.652a
33.061a
33.061a
33.061a
33.061a
35.302a
35.302a
35.302a
35.3023
* Sample
Hypothesis
df
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
Error df
3.266E3
3.266E3
3.266E3
3.266E3
3.266E3
3.266E3
3.266E3
3.266E3
3.266E3
3.266E3
3.266E3
3.266E3
3.266E3
3.266E3
3.266E3
3.266E3
Sig.
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
Partial
Eta
Squared
.762
.762
.762
.762
.078
.078
.078
.078
.075
.075
.075
.075
.080
.080
.080
.080
Noncent.
Paramete Observ
r Power*3
10452.337
10452.337
10452.337
10452.337
277.215
277.215
277.215
277.215
264.486
264.486
264.486
264.486
282.415
282.415
282.415
282.415
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
262
263
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Dependent
Source Variable
Type III
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square
Partial
Eta Noncent. Observed
Sig. Squared Parameter Power"
Corrected Overall
Model Engagement
Mean Short
Trust &
Transparency
Coaching
Career
Development
Challenging
and Meaningful
Improve
Working
Conditions
Open Climate
Communication
165.2353 3 55.078 72.025 .000 .062 216.075 1.000
179.338c 3 59.779 71.884 .000 .062 215.653 1.000
122.952° 3 40.984 45.928 .000 .040 137.784 1.000
37.019e 3 12.340 13.442 .000 .012 40.327 1.000
183.097' 3 61.032 123.245 .000 .101 369.734 1.000
171.5399 3 57.180 92.093 .000 .078 276.280 1.000
89.998h 3 29.999 42.486 .000 .037 127.458 1.000
43.2951 3 14.432 17.830 .000 .016 53.489 1.000
Intercept Overall
Engagement
Mean Short
Trust &
Transparency
Coaching
Career
Development
Challenging
and Meaningful
Improve
Working
Conditions
Open Climate
4436.855 1 4436.855 5.802E3 .000 .639 5801.989 1.000
4080.814 1 4080.814 4.907E3 .000 .600 4907.157 1.000
4104.545 1 4104.545 4.600E3 .000 .584 4599.689 1.000
3510.862 1 3510.862 3.825E3 .000 .539 3824.603 1.000
4416.264 1 4416.264 8.918E3 .000 .732 8917.895 1.000
4399.267 1 4399.267 7.085E3 .000 .684 7085.435 1.000
4016.570 1 4016.570 5.688E3 .000 .635 5688.388 1.000
264
Communication
Year Overall
Engagement
Mean Short
Trust &
Transparency
Coaching
Career
Development
Challenging
and Meaningful
Improve
Working
Conditions
Open Climate
Communication
Sample Overall
Engagement
Mean Short
Trust &
Transparency
Coaching
Career
Development
Challenging
and Meaningful
Improve
Working
Conditions
Open Climate
Communication
3670.365
88.797
71.585
80.005
13.390
91.890
81.961
46.885
18.297
57.996
21.804
34.749
5.138
77.446
76.290
27.038
2.562
1 3670.365
1 88.797
1 71.585
1 80.005
1 13.390
1 91.890
1 81.961
1 46.885
1 18.297
1 57.996
1 21.804
1 34.749
1 5.138
1 77.446
1 76.290
1 27.038
1 2.562
4.535E3
116.118
86.080
89.656
14.587
185.556
132.006
66.399
22.605
75.840
26.219
38.941
5.597
156.389
122.872
38.292
3.165
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.018
.000
.000
.000
.075
.581
.034
.026
.027
.004
.054
.039
.020
.007
.023
.008
.012
.002
.046
.036
.012
.001
4534.627
116.118
86.080
89.656
14.587
185.556
132.006
66.399
22.605
75.840
26.219
38.941
5.597
156.389
122.872
38.292
3.165
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
.968
1.000
1.000
1.000
.997
1.000
.999
1.000
.657
1.000
1.000
1.000
.428
Year * Overall
Sample Engagement 57.290 1 57.290 74.917 .000 .022 74.917 1.000
Mean Short
265
Trust &
Transparency
Coaching
Career
Development
Challenging
and Meaningful
Improve
Working
Conditions
Open Climate
Communication
Error Overall
Engagement
Mean Short
Trust &
Transparency
Coaching
Career
Development
Challenging
and Meaningful
Improve
Working
Conditions
Open Climate
Communication
Total Overall
Engagement
Mean Short
Trust &
Transparency
21.481
60.976
3.605
88.034
58.410
25.911
5.409
2502.905
2721.841
2920.670
3004.508
1620.835
2032.169
2311.065
2649.194
48784.083
41779.389
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3273
3273
3273
3273
3273
3273
3273
3273
3277
3277
21.481
60.976
3.605
88.034
58.410
25.911
5.409
.765
.832
.892
.918
.495
.621
.706
.809
25.831
68.332
3.927
177.771
94.075
36.696
6.683
.000
.000
.048
.000
.000
.000
.010
.008
.020
.001
.052
.028
.011
.002
25.831
68.332
3.927
177.771
94.075
36.696
6.683
.999
1.000
.508
1.000
1.000
1.000
.734
Coaching 44290.438 3277
266
34934.979 3277
49670.556 3277
Career
Development
Challenging
and Meaningful
Improve
Working 49438.000 3277
Conditions
Open Climate 41890.167 3277
Communication 35274.389 3277
Corrected Overall
Total Engagement 2668.140 3276
Mean Short
Trust &
Transparency
Coaching 3043.622 3276
Career
Development
Challenging
and Meaningful
Improve
Working 2203.708 3276
Conditions
Open Climate 2401.063 3276
Communication 2692.488 3276
2901.179 3276
3041.528 3276
1803.932 3276
a. R Squared = .062 (Adjusted R
Squared = .061)
b. Computed using alpha = .05
c. R Squared = .062 (Adjusted R Squared =
.061)
d. R Squared = .040 (Adjusted R Squared •
.040)
e. R Squared = .012 (Adjusted R Squared :
.011)
267
f. R Squared = .101 (Adjusted R Squared =
.101)
g. R Squared = .078 (Adjusted R Squared =
.077)
h. R Squared = .037 (Adjusted R Squared =
.037)
i. R Squared = .016 (Adjusted R Squared =
.015)
Descriptive Statistics
Year Sample Mean Std. Deviation N
Overall Engagement Mean Short 2006
2008
Total
Trust & Transparency 2006
2008
Total
Coaching 2006
2008
Total
Career Development 2006
2008
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
U S C S U
3.7062
2.1509
3.6662
3.8961
3.8913
3.8959
3.7760
2.9596
3.7513
.93628
.69665
.96277
.76554
.85506
.76873
.88199
1.16377
.90247
3.3146
2.3616
3.2901
3.7064
3.7029
3.7063
3.4587
2.9848
3.4444
.98840
.77882
.99492
.77102
.87271
.77471
.93367
1.06002
.94106
3.5246
2.1211
3.4885
3.6409
3.8370
3.6484
3.5674
2.9184
3.5478
.99689
.76141
1.01598
.86069
.81346
.85944
.95058
1.16247
.96388
3.0603
2.6336
3.0493
3.2406
3.2029
.99642
.86823
.99544
.89748
.82844
2009
53
2062
1169
46
1215
3178
99
3277
2009
53
2062
1169
46
1215
3178
99
3277
2009
53
2062
1169
46
1215
3178
99
3277
2009
53
2062
1169
46
268
Total
Challenging and Meaningful 2006
2008
Total
Improve Working Conditions 2006
2008
Total
Open Climate 2006
2008
Total
Communication 2006
2008
Total
Total
US BUs
US CSU
Total
US BUs
US CSU
Total
US BUs
US CSU
Total
US BUs
US CSU
Total
US Bus
US CSU
Total
US Bus
US CSU
Total
US BUs
US CSU
Total
US BUs
US CSU
Total
US BUs
US CSU
Total
US BUs
US CSU
Total
US BUs
US CSU
Total
US Bus
US CSU
Total
US BUs
US CSU
Total
3.2392
3.1266
2.8981
3.1197
.89467
.96499
.89250
.96355
3.8435
1.9811
3.7956
3.8643
3.9239
3.8665
3.8511
2.8838
3.8219
.72656
.61816
.78157
.66793
.66454
.66762
.70553
1.16361
.74206
3.7717
2.0943
3.7286
3.9162
3.8043
3.9119
3.8248
2.8889
3.7966
.83797
.61802
.87422
.70208
.76844
.70469
.79366
1.09937
.82017
3.4219
2.3679
3.3948
3.6018
3.5906
3.6014
3.4880
2.9360
3.4714
.90450
.70813
.91519
.72284
.84233
.72733
.84659
.98363
.85611
3.0845
2.6824
3.0742
3.2844
3.3587
3.2872
3.1581
2.9966
3.1532
.94653
.90598
.94744
.81694
.78879
.81570
.90604
.91442
.90658
1215
3178
99
3277
2009
53
2062
1169
46
1215
3178
99
3277
2009
53
2062
1169
46
1215
3178
99
3277
2009
53
2062
1169
46
1215
3178
99
3277
2009
53
2062
1169
46
1215
3178
99
3277
269
Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) for Talent Management Construct
Supervisor = 1
Multivariate Tests
Effect
Intercept
Year
Sample
Year*
Sample
Pillai's Trace
Wilks' Lambda
Hotelling's Trace
Roy's Largest Root
Pillai's Trace
Wilks' Lambda
Hotelling's Trace
Roy's Largest Root
Pillai's Trace
Wilks' Lambda
Hotelling's Trace
Roy's Largest Root
Pillai's Trace
Wilks' Lambda
Hotelling's Trace
Roy's Largest Root
Value
.834
.166
5.027
5.027
.129
.871
.148
.148
.115
.885
.131
.131
.127
.873
.145
.145
F
1.004E3a
1.004E33
1.004E36
1.004E3a
29.520a
29.5203
29.520a
29.520a
26.0793
26.079a
26.079a
26.079a
28.964a
28.964a
28.964a
28.964a
Hypothesis
df
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
Error df
1.598E3
1.598E3
1.598E3
1.598E3
1.598E3
1.598E3
1.598E3
1.598E3
1.598E3
1.598E3
1.598E3
1.598E3
1.598E3
1.598E3
1.598E3
1 598E3
Sig.
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
Partial
Eta
Squared
.834
.834
.834
.834
.129
.129
.129
.129
.115
.115
.115
.115
.127
.127
.127
.127
Noncent.
Parameter
8033.002
8033.002
8033.002
8033.002
236.162
236.162
236.162
236.162
208.630
208.630
208.630
208.630
231.712
231.712
231.712
231.712
Observ
Power"
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
a. Exact statistic
b. Computed using alpha = .05
c. Design: Intercept + Year + Sample + Year'
Sample
270
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Dependent
Source Variable
Type III Sum Mean
of Squares df Square Sig.
Partial
Eta Noncent. Observed
Squared Parameter Power"
Corrected Overall
Model Engagement
Mean Short
Trust &
Transparency
Coaching
Career
Development
Challenging and
Meaningful
Improve Working
Conditions
Open Climate
Communication
99.847a 3 33.282 49.763 .000 .085 149.288 1.000
93.192c 3 31.064 53.056 .000 .090 159.167 1.000
52.014° 3 17.338 24.524 .000 .044 73.572 1.000
8.980s 2.993 3.788 .010 .007 11.363 .817
129.512f 3 43.171 105.943 .000 .165 317.829 1.000
86.2779 3 28.759 61.889 .000 .104 185.668 1.000
74.581h 3 24.860 45.790 .000 .079 137.370 1.000
19.2071 3 6.402 8.435 .000 .016 25.305 .994
Intercept Overall
Engagement
Mean Short
Trust &
Transparency
Coaching
Career
Development
Challenging and
Meaningful
Improve Working
Conditions
Open Climate
Communication
2561.979 1 2561.979 3.831 E3 .000 .705 3830.581 1.000
2518.300 1 2518.300 4.301E3 .000 .728 4301.123 1.000
2403.804 1 2403.804 3.400E3 .000 .679 3400.073 1.000
2211.341 1 2211.341 2.798E3 .000 .635 2797.943 1.000
2591.114 1 2591.114 6.359E3 .000 .798 6358.714 1.000
2658.077 1 2658.077 5.720E3 .000 .781 5720.199 1.000
2495.793 1 2495.793 4.597E3 .000 .741 4596.971 1.000
2316.965 1 2316.965 3.053E3 .000 .655 3052.537 1.000
271
Year
Sample
Year*
Sample
Overall
Engagement
Mean Short
Trust &
Transparency
Coaching
Career
Development
Challenging and
Meaningful
Improve Working
Conditions
Open Climate
Communication
Overall
Engagement
Mean Short
Trust &
Transparency
Coaching
Career
Development
Challenging and
Meaningful
Improve Working
Conditions
Open Climate
Communication
Overall
Engagement
Mean Short
Trust &
60.402
49.693
28.856
3.811
63.753
41.156
42.742
12.006
31.694
24.919
15.591
2.438
52.456
38.045
25.710
.468
48.252
25.928
1 60.402
1 49.693
1 28.856
1 3.811
1 63.753
1 41.156
1 42.742
1 12.006
1 31.694
1 24.919
1 15.591
1 2.438
1 52.456
1 38.045
1 25.710
1 .468
1 48.252
1 25.928
90.310
84.874
40.816
4.822
156.452
88.568
78.725
15.818
47.387
42.560
22.053
3.085
128.728
81.872
47.354
.617
72.145
44.284
.000
.000
.000
.028
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.079
.000
.000
.000
.432
.000
.000
.053
.050
.025
.003
.089
.052
.047
.010
.029
.026
.014
.002
.074
.049
.029
.000
.043
.027
90.310
84.874
40.816
4.822
156.452
88.568
78.725
15.818
47.387
42.560
22.053
3.085
128.728
81.872
47.354
.617
72.145
44.284
1.000
1.000
1.000
.593
1.000
1.000
1.000
.978
1.000
1.000
.997
.419
1.000
1.000
1.000
.123
1.000
1.000 Transparency
Coaching
Career
Development
Challenging and
Meaningful
Improve Working
Conditions
Open Climate
Communication
Error Overall
Engagement
Mean Short
Trust &
Transparency
Coaching
Career
Development
Challenging and
Meaningful
Improve Working
Conditions
Open Climate
Communication
Total Overall
Engagement
Mean Short
Trust &
Transparency
Coaching
Career
Development
Challenging and
Meaningful
272
31.307 1
1.483 1
61.810 1
35.090 1
32.596 1
5.130 1
1073.460 1605
939.725 1605
1134.712 1605
1268.504 1605
654.022 1605
745.816 1605
871.388 1605
1218.242 1605
25715.667 1609
24401.083 1609
23281.451 1609
19774.986 1609
27116.194 1609
31.307 44.283
1.483 1.876
61.810 151.684
35.090 75.515
32.596 60.038
5.130 6.758
.669
.585
.707
.790
.407
.465
.543
.759
.000 .027
.171 .001
.000 .086
.000 .045
.000 .036
.009 .004
44.283 1.000
1.876 .278
151.684 1.000
75.515 1.000
60.038 1.000
6.758 .738
273
Improve Working
Conditions 26759.083 1609
Open Climate 24463.000 1609
Communication 19849.278 1609
Corrected Overall
Total Engagement 1173.307 1608
Mean Short
1032.917 1608 Trust &
Transparency
Coaching 1186.726 1608
Career
Development
Challenging and
Meaningful
Improve Working
Conditions
Open Climate 945.970 1608
1277.484 1608
783.534 1608
832.093 1608
Communication 1237.449 1608
a. R Squared = .085 (Adjusted R Squared
= .083)
b. Computed using alpha = .05
c. R Squared = .090 (Adjusted R Squared = .089)
d. R Squared = .044 (Adjusted R Squared = .042)
e. R Squared = .007 (Adjusted R Squared = .005)
f. R Squared = .165 (Adjusted R Squared = .164)
g. R Squared = .104 (Adjusted R Squared = .102)
h. R Squared = .079 (Adjusted R Squared = .077)
i. R Squared = .016 (Adjusted R Squared = .014)
274
Descriptive Statistics
Year Sample Mean Std. Deviation
Overall Engagement Mean 2006 US BUs
Short
Trust & Transparency
Coaching
USCSU
Total
2008 US BUs
USCSU
Total
Total US BUs
USCSU
Total
3.8935
2.1264
3.8441
4.0094
4.1944
4.0172
3.9342
3.0629
3.9055
.87823
.65716
.91993
.71146
.57245
.70672
.82509
1.20727
.85421
1009
29
1038
547
24
571
1556
53
1609
2006
2008
Total
2006
2008
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
3.7387
2.3218
3.6991
4.0137
4.0278
4.0143
3.8354
3.0943
3.8110
3.7375
2.3966
3.7001
3.7061
3.9375
3.7158
3.7265
3.0943
3.7057
.84034
.71538
.86880
.61628
.51935
.61213
.77998
1.06293
.80147
.88399
.76333
.90785
.76817
.60904
.76313
.84496
1.03801
.85908
1009
29
1038
547
24
571
1556
53
1609
1009
29
1038
547
24
571
1556
53
1609
Career Development 2006 US BUs 3.3617 .94181 1009
275
Challenging and Meaningful
Improve Working Conditions
Open Climate
2008
Total
2006
2008
Total
2006
2008
Total
2006
2008
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUS
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
2.9713
3.3508
3.4650
3.4167
3.4629
3.3980
3.1730
3.3906
4.0763
1.9540
4.0170
4.0935
4.1806
4.0972
4.0824
2.9623
4.0455
4.0208
2.3218
3.9733
4.0899
4.0556
4.0884
4.0451
3.1069
4.0142
3.8077
2.2931
3.7654
3.9241
4.0139
.94420
.94362
.78575
.73228
.78304
.89118
.87597
.89132
.67904
.69991
.76412
.55647
.52914
.55518
.63851
1.28046
.69805
.72387
.75846
.77674
.59990
.46798
.59466
.68346
1.07968
.71935
.78755
.72874
.82438
.63811
.62538
29
1038
547
24
571
1556
53
1609
1009
29
1038
547
24
571
1556
53
1609
1009
29
1038
547
24
571
1556
53
1609
1009
29
1038
547
24
276
Communication
Total
2006
2008
Total
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
US BUs
USCSU
Total
3.9279
3.8487
3.0723
3.8231
3.3454
2.9310
3.3338
3.5140
3.7361
3.5234
3.4047
3.2956
3.4011
.63730
.74035
1.09852
.76700
.93095
.84693
.93084
.76223
.56448
.75590
.87880
.83118
.87724
571
1556
53
1609
1009
29
1038
547
24
571
1556
53
1609
Reference List
2008 Top Five Total Rewards Priorities Survey. (2008). Deloitte Consulting LLP
Ashton, C, & Morton, L. (2005). Managing talent for competitive advantage. Strategic Human Resources Review, 4(5), 28-31.
Barlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. (2002). Building competitive advantage through people. Sloan Management Review, 43(2), 34-41.
Barney, J. (1986). Organizational culture: Can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage? Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 656-665.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 77(1), 99-120.
Boudreau, J. W., & Ramstad, P. M. (1997). Measuring intellectual capital: Learning from financial history. Human Resource Management, 36(3), 343-356.
Boudreau, J. W., & Ramstad, P. M. (2005). Talentship and the new paradigm for Human Resource Management: From professional practices to strategic talent decision science. Human Resource Planning, 28(2), 17-26.
Bowers, D. G. (1973). OD techniques and their results in 23 organizations: The Michigan ICL Study. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 9(\), 21-43.
Buckingham, M., & Vosburgh, R. M. (2001). The 21st century human resources function: It's the talent, stupid! Human Resource Planning, 24(4), 17-23.
Burke, W. W. (2002). Organization change: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Byham, W. C. (2001). Are leaders born or made? Workspan, 44(\2), 56-60.
Cheloha, R., & Swain, J. (2005). Talent management system key to effective succession planning. Canadian HR Reporter, 18(17), 5-7.
Church, A. H., & Waclawski, J. (1998). Designing and using organizational surveys. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
277
278
Cohn, J. M., Khurana, R., & Reeves, L. (2005). Growing talent as if your business depended on it. Harvard Business Review, 53(10), 63-70.
Conger, J. A., & Fulmer, R. M. (2003). Developing your leadership pipeline. Harvard Business Review, 5/(12), 76-84.
Cook, T., & Campbell, D. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: design & analysis issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Cooperrider, D. L., & Sekerka, L. E. (2003). Inquiry into the appreciative world: Toward a theory of positive organization change. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Crabtree, S. (2005). Engagement keeps the doctor away. Gallup Management Journal, http://gmj.gallup.com (January 13).
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2005). Organization development & change (8th ed.). Mason, OH: Thomson South-Western.
Davis, I., & Stephenson, E. (2006). Ten Trends to Watch in 2006. The McKinsey Quarterly, 1-5.
Debunking the Myths of Employee Engagement. (2006).Watson Wyatt.
Driving performance and retention through employee engagement. (2004). Washington DC: Corporate Leadership Council.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theory from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25-32.
Employee Engagement Report 2006. (2006).Blessing White.
Employee Engagement Underpins Business Transformation. (2008). Towers Perrin -IRS.
Everybody's doing it. (2006). Economist, 557(8498), 5-8.
279
Falkenberg, J., Stensaker, I., Meyer, C. B., & Haueng, A. C. (2005). When change becomes excessive. In R. W. Woodman & W. A. Pasmore (Eds.), Research in Organizational Change and Development (Vol. 15, pp. 31-62). Oxford, UK: Elsevier (JAI Press).
Farley, C. (2005). HR's role in talent management and driving business results. Employment Relations Today, 32(1), 55-61.
A framework for talent management. (2007). Workforce Management, 86(12).
Frank, F. D., & Taylor, C. R. (2004). Talent management: Trends that will shape the future. Human Resource Planning, 27(1), 33-41.
Gallup study: Engaged employees inspire company innovation. (2006). Gallup Management Journal, http://gmj.gallup.com (October 12, 2006).
Garger, E. M. (1999). Holding on to high performers: A strategic approach to retention. Compensation and Benefits Management, 15(4), 10-17.
Gebauer, J. (2006). Building the global village: The challenge of engaging and managing employees worldwide. The Quarterly Journal of the EDS Agility Alliance, 1(2), 24-32.
Global Workforce Study. (2005). Towers Perrin.
Grant, R. M. (2005). Contemporary Strategic Analysis (5th ed.). Maiden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Grossman, R. J. (2007). IBM's HR takes a risk. HR Magazine, 52(4), 54-59.
Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1994). Competing for the future. Harvard Business Review, 72(4), 122-129.
Heinen, J. S., & O'Neill, C. (2004). Managing talent to maximize performance. Employment Relations Today, 31, 67-82.
Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. Londone: McGraw-Hill International.
Huselid, M. A. (1995). The impact of human resource practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 635-672.
280
Jackson, S. E., & Schuler, R. S. (1990). Human resource planning: Challenges for industrial/organizational psychologists. American Psychologist, 45(2), 223-239.
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692-724.
Kerlinger, F. N., & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research (4th ed.): Thomson Learning, Inc.
Kesler, G. C. (2002). Why the leadership bench never gets deeper: ten insights about executive talent development. Human Resource Planning, 25, 32-34.
Kress, N. (2005). Engaging your employees through the power of communication. Workspan, 48(5), 26-32.
Kvale, S. (1989). To validate is to question. In S. Kvale (Ed.), Issue of validity in qualitative research (pp. 73-92). Lund, Sweden: Student-litteratur.
Lado, A. A., & Wilson, M. C. (1994). Human resource systems and sustained competitive advantage: A competency-based perspective. Academy of Management Review, 19(A), 699-727.
Lawler, E. E., Ill, & Worley, C. D. (2006). Built to Change: How to achieve sustained organizational effectiveness. San Francisco, CA: Wiley and Sons.
Leiter, M., & Maslach, C. (1988). The impact of interpersonal environment on burnout and organizational commitment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 9, 297-308.
Lewis, R. E., & Heckman, R. J. (2006). Talent management: A critical review. Human Resource Management Review, 16(2), 139-154.
Lockwood, N. R. (2006). Talent Management Driver for Organizational Success. HR Magazine, 51(6), 1-11.
Lockwood, N. R. (2007). Leveraging employee engagement for competitive advantage: HR's strategic role. HR Magazine, 52(3), 1-11.
Ludema, J. D., Whitney, D., Mohr, B. J., & Griffin, T. J. (2003). The appreciative inquiry summit: A practioner's guide for leading large group change. San Francisco: Barrett-Koehler.
281
Maslach, C, & Leiter, M. (1997). The truth about burnout. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Maslach, C, Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397-422.
May, D. R., Gilson, R. L., & Harter, L. M. (2004). The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 11-37.
May, D. R., Gilson, R. L., & Harter, L. M. (2004). The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 77,11-37.
McCauley, C, & Wakefield, M. (2006). Talent management in the 21st century: Help your company find, develop and keep its strongest workers. The Journal for Quality & Participation, 29(4), 4-7.
Measuring True Employee Engagement. (2006). Right Management.
Michaels, E., Handfield- Jones, H., & Axelrod, B. (2001). The War for Talent. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Nadler, D. (1977). Feedback and organization development: Using data-based methods. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Newman, I., & Benz, C. R. (1998). Qualitative-quantitative research methodology: Exploring the interactive continuum. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Oakes, K. (2006). The emergence of talent management. Training and Development, ^ 60(A), 21-23.
Olsen, R. (2000). Harnessing the internet with human capital management. Workspan, 45(11), 24-27.
Pfeffer, J. (1994). Competitive advantage through people. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
282
Ramarajan, L., & Barsade, S. G. (2006). What makes the job tough? The influence of organizational burnout in the human services. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania.
Ready, D. A., & Conger, J. A. (2007). Make your company a talent factory. Harvard Business Review, 85(6), 68-77.
Redford, K. (2005). Shedding light on talent tactics. Personnel Today, September, 20-22.
Reed, J. (2007). Appreciative inquiry: research for change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Rossman, G. B., & Wilson, B. L. (1985). Numbers and words: combining quantitative and qualitative methods in a single large-scale evaluation study. Evaluation Review, 9(5), 627-643.
Rothbard, N. P. (2001). Enriching or depleting? The dynamics of engagement in work and family roles. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 655-684.
Rothwell, W. J. (2000). Effective succession planning: Ensuring leadership continuity and building talent from within (2nd ed.). New York: Amacom.
Rothwell, W. J. (2002). Putting success into your succession planning. Journal of Business Strategy, 23(3), 32-37.
Rothwell, W. J., & Poduch, S. (2004). Introducing technical (not managerial) succession planning. Public Personnel Management, 33(4), 405-419.
Rothwell, W. J., & Wellins, R. (2004). Mapping your future: Putting new competencies to work for you. Training and Development, 58(5), 1-8.
Rubin, H., & Rubin, I. (2005). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(1), 600-619.
Salanova, M., Agut, S., & Peiro, J. M. (2005). Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: The mediation of service climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1217-1227.
283
Schein, E. (1978). Career dynamics: Matching individual and organization needs. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Schein, E. (1996). Career anchors revisited: Implications for career development in the 21st century. Academy of Management Executive, 10(4), 80-88.
Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational Culture. American Psychologist, 45(2), 109-119.
Scott, W. R. (1965). Field methods in the study of organizations. In J. G. March (Ed.), Handbook of Organizations (pp. 261-304). Chicago: Rand-McNally.
SHRM HR Glossary, www.shrm.ors.
Snow, C. C, & Thomas, J. B. (1994). Field research methods in strategic management: Contributions to theory building and testing. Journal of Management Studies, 31(4), 457-480.
Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace.
Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (Vol. 3rd, pp. 443-466): Thousand Oaks, CA.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Ulrich, D., & Lake, D. (1991). Organizational capability: Creating competitive advantage. Academy of Management Executive, 5(1), 77-92.
Vance, R. J. (2006). Effective practice guidelines: Employee engagement and commitment. Alexandria, VA: SHRM Foundation.
Venkatraman, N., & Zaheer, A. (1990). Electronic integration and strategic advantage: A quasi-experimental study in the insurance industry. Information Systems Research, 1(4), 377-393.
Whitney, D., & Trosten-Bloom, A. (2003). The power of appreciative inquiry: A practical guide to positive change. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Worley, C. D., Hitchin, D. E., & Ross, W. D. (1996). Integrated strategic change. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
284
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and method (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.