Work

"For constructivists, the moral response is a caring response. ... The only good opinion is a humanistic one, one that shows an immense respect for the world and the people in it and for those you are going to affect." — Mary Field Belenky, et. al., Women's Ways of Knowing.

* * *

In the seminal 1974 oral history Working: People Talk about What They Do All Day and How They Feel about What They Do, author Studs Terkel's core conclusions foretold of the fundamental variables now touted as engagement "drivers." Compared now to 21st century definitions of engagement, Terkel presciently describes workers' desires as a "search for daily meaning as well as daily bread, for recognition as well as cash, for astonishment rather than torpor; in short, for a sort of life other than a Monday through Friday sort of dying."

Core to satisfaction at work, beyond a paycheck, is meaningfulness of work. This includes consciously choosing pathways to challenge complacency and mediocrity. Despite systematic constraints that cause floundering, the responsibility in revealing meaning and unlocking passion, or escaping the common place, resides in each employee. Meaning is always a personal quest and derived by diving into growth and regulating self in relationship to tasks and contexts.

However, the organizational chart does exist, so leaders are responsible for "driving" the processes and mitigating road blocks to help construct meaning within ourselves, our respective departments, units, and among the company of fellow travelers. Managers, supervisors, directors, and executives who serve others possess substantial influence in creating effective contexts and tasks which fuel worker passion and engagement.

Thus, formal leaders also possess a greater share of engagement responsibility, yet they often emblazon the scaffolding of their "construction" sites with the dubious motto "Manage to Avoid." This architecture of disengagement manages to breed indifference. Alternatively, the depth of design in making a difference resides in personal answers to two questions:

Am I allowed space to flourish? Are my talents appreciated?

Responses to these questions imply joint responsibility, but for each person to progressively add value, we must also ask general organizational questions, such as "Am I provided the opportunity to make a difference and to bring my greatest assets? Are the values I bring valued by the company I keep? And more specific questions: Am I provided sufficient development and autonomy to make decisions, ask hard questions to fuel my initiative without threat, suspicion, or dismissal? Does the company or organization have purposeful and real, meaningful growth and development concretely built into my schedule and annual performance plan?"

Consumed by deadlines, attending to daily appreciation, acknowledgement, and recognition (valuations) may appear as superfluous considerations to some, but remains a necessary part of facile multi-tasking in the most engaged cultures. Yet, too often, the work day is overladen with tasks in which the employee fulfills the job description without earning the benefit of discretionary time. No time appears to be available to think beyond the immediate demands.

The "above and beyond" initiative engagement attracts can be easily ignored. Perhaps this is why many managers will argue during an annual performance review, "It's unrealistic to believe that you have earned a top rating." Actually, the standards are not so high; ironically, they are not high enough. For instance, an employee's efforts may have resulted in millions of dollars of recurring profits or savings. The employee may be recognized at a luncheon for the contribution but sometimes not a single high level executive is in attendance or takes the time to personally congratulate the person.

Or conversely, a team carries out an impossibly complex project without proper prep time nor resources. Against long odds, the outcome is moderately successful but more publically and privately criticized for its failings. Rather than leaders coaching and guiding the team members through regrouping and improvements, blame is ascribed. Some team members are pulled off the project rather than providing new or reinvigorating roles within the team to create greater collective opportunity and success.

Managers protect fragile distortions of what excellence means when they suggest that high marks are unattainable. For instance, in year-end evaluations, many of us have heard some form of this declaration, "If everyone earns a four out of four, there's no more to achieve!" Professing that only one or two employees are "Outstanding," thus maintaining a normal curve of mediocrity, is far easier than actually facing the obvious: that is, the failure to legitimately coach and dedicate ample time to help everyone excel and attain what is an outstanding level for them. What's missing is not a team member's skills and acumen, which should have been properly identified during hiring, but managerial accountability.

In the end, disengaged supervisors are likely not honest enough to talk to their disengaged employees, or equally destructive, not honest enough to acknowledge engaged employees, who by omission are being taught to be disengaged or mediocre. "Work," when managers ignore the obvious, lacks open, systematic means of fully attending to and understanding the interconnectivity of the person's direction, goal, participation, and fit within the company and its mission.

Above Board or Under Cover

And employees, perhaps after prior experiences of being disenfranchised or ignored, intrinsically feel unable to discuss their ambitions, concerns, or growth opportunities with their supervisors. Similarly, the opportunity for input or participation in decision-making are noticeably sparse. New leaders may lament, "I'm constrained by and limited to ...," yet the truths are found in how we, in ourselves and in others, cultivate a universe of creative and questioning minds. We should not find ourselves captive to the ordinary. Time must expand to attend to neglected engagement needs.

While later in this book, the television show The Walking Dead is used as a workplace metaphor, another popular series, Undercover Boss, has generated a telling mixture of pertinent business lessons. The most important lesson is the actual ability to slip undercover (and not be recognized) reveals the real problem of disconnectedness that cripples awareness, not being aware of employee concerns about problems they perceive to be at hand or their stories: "It shouldn't take an undercover executive or a reality TV production crew to shine a spotlight on outstanding employees."...