“Employee engagement” has become one of those data points in the workplace surveys that I just can’t get behind. The problem is the language focuses on the employee’s feelings and attitude rather than the quality of the leadership, which is usually the root cause of people feeling disengaged.

Employee engagement is typically measured by asking people how engaged and committed they feel to their work and workplace—not in those exact words, but that’s the gist of it. It’s supposedly a useful metric for employers who want to know whether their staff are emotionally invested in the work, whether they feel aligned with the goals of the organization, and consequently, if they will work hard and not quit.

Like I said, “employee engagement” focuses on the the disposition of employees rather than problems with management. In this article, for example, “poor leadership” is listed as the eighth and last reason employees might be disengaged. If someone is not emotionally invested in the goals of the organization, the question worth asking is why? It typically has little to do with the employee and everything to do with management. For example, are managers making the goals of the organization clear? Do employees know what they are? Do managers explain the goals and objectives clearly and in ways that allow workers to connect them to their day-to-day tasks and see how their contributions matter?

To improve employee engagement, you have to start with managers and employers creating an environment where they can be engaged.

Too often, employers, managers, and even HR personnel assume that low employee engagement is the fault of the worker, not the employer. They need to be a whole lot more introspective if they want engaged workers.

Image by Thought Catalog on Unsplash