Much of our effort to improve employee engagement is organised around conversations of problem solving, deficiencies, holding others accountable and creating change through leadership, legislation and programme driven improvement.
We bet on the future by identifying problems, assessing their cause and developing action plans which lead to tangible investments and programmes. This is a desire to control the future through specifically identified destinations and blueprints to reach that future. This has the side effect of encouraging employees to turn their future over to specialised experts, full time implementers, and formal leaders.
An alternative is to organise around conversations of possibility, gifts (the value-add that people bring to an organisation), holding ourselves accountable and inviting change through engagement and being pulled forward by an alternative future as it emerges.
In, this alternative approach, we recognise and reframe problems as symptoms, avoid assessing causes, postpone tangible investments and programmes, and invest in the intangible assets, which we call engagement and social capital. This is a strategy to create a future through a shift in context and ‘language', a shift in how we engage each other when we come together, and a shift in how we think about the physical architecture within which we live.
We commonly cite problems such as low engagement, leadership not leading by example, entitlement culture, uncommitted workforce or the lack of empowerment. Yet if we continue to treat these conditions as problems, there will be no breakthroughs. There can be no real shift if we act on them in the existing context using the existing language. At best, we will achieve marginal improvements or slow the deterioration.
The means of engagement
There is evidence that what makes a significant difference in reducing the symptoms and achieving authentic, positive returns on our tangible investments is the extent to which employees take personal and communal responsibility for the well being of the whole. We might name this the condition where we live within a culture of accountability.
Engagement as used here is much broader and more demanding than the usual lens of getting a group of people to give inputs, creating pride-building special events, and marketing the benefits of a new strategy.
Engagement is the individual and collective choice of how we choose to be together. It is to collectively create the power to cause a breakthrough in the social capital of the community.
This kind of engagement begins with a shift in language, which correlates with a shift in context. This shift is towards:
1. Possibility rather than problem solving
2. Gifts rather than deficiencies
3. Ownership rather than blame
4. Commitment rather than barter
5. Invitation rather than mandate
1. The invitation conversation
The invitation must contain a hurdle or demand if accepted. It is a challenge to engage. Most leadership initiatives or training are about how we get or 'enrol' people to do tasks and feel good about doing things they may not want to do. People need to 'self-enrol' in order to experience their freedom of choice and commitment. The leadership task is to name the debate, issue the invitation and invest in those who choose to show up. Those who accept the call will bring the next circle of people into the conversation.
2. The ownership conversation
This conversation begins with the question: "How have I contributed to creating the current reality?" Confusion, blame and waiting for someone else to change are a defence against ownership and personal power. The enemy of ownership is innocence and indifference. The future is denied with the response: "It doesn't matter to me. Whatever you want to do is fine." Such a statement is always a lie and just a polite way of avoiding a difficult conversation about ownership. People best create that which they own and co-creation is the bedrock of accountability. It is the belief that I am the cause, not the effect. The leadership task is to confront people with their freedom.
3. The possibility conversation
This focuses on what we want our future to be as opposed to problem-solving the past. This is based on an understanding that living systems are really propelled towards the future. The possibility conversation frees people to innovate, challenge the status quo, and create new futures that make a difference. In new work environments, this conversation has the ability for breaking new ground and in understanding the prevailing culture. Problem-solving and negotiation of interests makes tomorrow only a little different from yesterday. Possibility is a break from the past and opens the space for a future we had only dreamed of. Declaring a possibility wholeheartedly is the transformation. The leadership task is to postpone problem solving and stay focused on possibility until it is spoken with resonance and passion.
4. The dissent conversation
This allows people the space to say 'no'. If we cannot say 'no', then our 'yes' has no meaning. People have a chance to express their doubts and reservations as a way of clarifying their roles, needs, and yearnings within the vision and mission being presented. Genuine commitment begins with doubt, and 'no' is a symbolic expression of people finding their space and role in the strategy. It is when we fully understand what people do not want that we can fully design what they want. Refusal is the foundation for commitment. The leadership task is to surface doubts and dissent without having an answer to every question.
5. The commitment conversation
This is about individuals making promises to their peers about their contribution to the success of the whole organisation. It is centred in two questions: What promise am I willing to make to this enterprise? And what is the price I am willing to pay for the success of the whole effort? It is a promise for the sake of a larger purpose, not for the sake of personal return. The leadership task is to reject lip service and demand either authentic commitment or ask people to say no and pass. We need the commitment of much fewer people than we thought to create the future we have in mind.
6. The gifts conversation
What are the gifts and assets we bring to the enterprise? Rather than focus on our deficiencies and weaknesses, which will most likely not go away, focus on the gifts we bring and capitalise on those. Instead of seeing problems in people and work, the conversation is about searching for the mystery that brings the highest achievement and success in work organisations. Confront people with their essential core that has the potential to make the difference. This resolves the unnatural separation between work and life. The leadership task is to bring the gifts of those on the margin into the centre.
Summary
These ideas can be challenging because they treat what we thought was interesting but less critical, such as an invitation, the process of a meeting, the choice of language, the shape of a room, as central and decisive. The ideas also can be seen as a way to redistribute power from formal leaders to employees. It is not about a shift in power but rather a way to produce power. Power in these terms is the capacity to make a difference in our lives and the life of our co-workers. Companies will become reconciled and work for all when more and more people act as owners and stakeholders, which is what comes from this kind of power.
None of this is an argument against our existing efforts to rebuild and engage our workforce. It is more an intention to shift the context within which these efforts occur. The context of engagement and possibility is really intended to reengage the large number of employees that now sit as bystanders to the struggle for deeper meaning at work.
Peter Block
Founding partner, Flame Centre (Singapore)
http://www.flamecentre.com/
