The Best Workers Are the Least Engaged

Friday, December 20, 2013

 

Is this possible, some organizations’ best workers are those who are the least engaged?  Susan Adams, a staff writer at Forbes, reported a 2013 study, “Job Performance Not a Predictor of Employee Engagement”, authored by Mark Murphy, CEO of Leadership IQ which found that job performance is not a predictor of an employee's engagement level.  Thus, it would appear, low performers could be more engaged than high performers.  If true, the findings reported in the study brings into question many of the commonly held beliefs of a large number of employers.  A PDF of the full report is available at: Study  

 

“Low Performers Are the Most Motivated To Give 100% Effort at Work.”

Why aren’t top performers giving 100%?  They are not being challenged or motivated to perform up to their full potential.  Murphy’s recommendation is to have one-on-one time with those high performers to provide a few gentle “Shoves and Tugs” to direct them towards opportunities for them to shine and thus feel recognized.
 

"Low Performers Are More Likely To Recommend Their Organization As A “Great Place To Work.”

This directly impacts the applicants, customers, and vendors with which an organization has to deal.  The concern Murphy has with this is simple, if an employer’s top talent does not perceive the organization as a great place to work, they are going to be job hunting and soon.

 

"When Low Performers Are Not Held Accountable For Poor Performance It Negatively Impacts High and Middle Performers."

It always seems there are a few workers who just do not carry their load, yet they are rewarded as if they did.  So while low performers are delivering 50% or 75%, an organization’s top performers are knocking down 125% or 200% just to keep the project on its timeline and under budget.  Leadership IQ’s advice, hold every employee accountable for their work.  This would be a good use of some “Shoves and Tugs” for those low performers to “shape up or ship out.”

 

"High Performer Efforts Go Largely Unrecognized While Low Performers Receive Positive Reinforcement."

An organization’s top performers are self-starters, self-mangers, and deliver results.  Low performers need a constant stream of directions and follow-up by managers, who have little time left over for top performers.  Murphy believes that organizations must identify those attitudes, in addition to skills, which create successful employees for their businesses.

 

"High Performers Feel Helpless About the Trajectory of Their Careers."

High performers want to be in charge of their lives and especially their careers.  Leadership IQ relates this to linking the organization’s vision, the acquisition of attitudes and skills, and top performers finding a role to help the employer achieve that vision.

 

"Low Performers Don’t Know They Are Low Performers."

It is a very unpleasant and uncomfortable situation to sit down, face to face with any employee and say they are not performing.  The impact on the high performer is de-motivating since they perceive the low performer is not being held accountable.  So, they start job hunting.  Murphy thinks this not a lack of skills, rather the wrong attitudes.  Change the attitudes, and you will change the performance.