January
2008
There isn’t a perfect route to employee engagement, a single path that passes from manager to employee to productivity to profit. Instead, there are as many effective ways to manage people to attain high performance as there are great managers. Want proof? Here's the story of two managers with very different styles, both of whom have become highly successful with the same company, Mars Incorporated.
All too often, companies treat prospective employees in ways they would never dream of treating their customers -- much to the dismay of frustrated job applicants. What those companies don't realize is that every time they aggravate a prospective employee, they risk damaging their organization's reputation and brand.
Building a strengths-based organization seems like it would be simple. The concept is so intuitive, the thinking goes, that embedding strengths in a company’s DNA should be almost effortless. But this is one of the biggest myths about strengths management -- and, for that matter, about managing transformational change.
Leading economists are joining researchers who seek new approaches to measuring -- and influencing -- well-being. Here are their latest insights into a subject that has implications not only for business executives, but for global leaders too.
When evaluating and developing employees, managers must distinguish what’s innate in them (talent) from what can be changed or acquired (knowledge and skills). The authors of Human Sigma: Managing the Employee-Customer Encounter dig deeper into this crucial distinction.
It's summed up this way: "My associates or fellow employees are committed to doing quality work." This means that managers should make sure that their teams aren't infiltrated by slackers, who can hurt performance and undermine the morale of those determined to do their jobs to excellence.