Kenneth Nowack, Ph.D.

“Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?”
“That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,” said the Cat.
“I don’t much care where” said Alice.
“Then it doesn’t matter which way you go,” said the Cat. 

Dodgson, C.L., 1865

Please see my latest column in Talent Management magazine: “It’s Not How Smart Your Are, but How You Are Smart”¹.

WHAT IS IT?
There appears to be no dearth in controversies regarding the construct of Emotional Intelligence.  Today, it is still unclear if “emotional intelligence” is measuring social intelligence, interpersonal competence, self-awareness, emotional control, relationship intelligence, aspects of the “big five” personality constructs, emotional competence, emotional resilience, core self-evaluations, transformational leadership, intrapersonal intelligence or other related concepts (or aspects of all of them).  For a wealth of resources, research and discussion on the topic of emotional intelligence, you might want to check out the Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence for Organizations.

HOW DO YOU MEASURE EI?

There are three distinct approaches to measuring EI representing different fields of study whereby Emotional Intelligence was defined. The first, delineated by Reuven Bar-On, was influenced by his interest in the aspects of performance not linked to intelligence; the second, Daniel Goleman’s interpretation, approached EI through competencies; and the third, represented by Mayer and Salovey, was influenced by their interest in the relationship between cognition and emotion.

These three approaches have led to diverse and non-overlapping measures of EI characterized as: 1) Personality based (e.g, Bar-On Emotion Quotient Inventory); 2) Competency or “Mixed” models (e.g., Emotional Intelligence View 360); and 3) Ability Based (e.g., Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT).

DOES IT PREDICT ANYTHING?

A recent meta-analysis of 69 independent studies explored the predictive validity of emotional intelligence with diverse job performance outcomes².  Their results suggested diverse measures of EI correlated .23 with job performance (k=19, N=4158) and .22 with general mental ability.  These findings suggest that caution should be used when using common measures of EI to make predictions about future job performance and career/life success.

There is no doubt that sometimes leaders who are “competent jerks” do succeed (often causing mental stress and adverse emotional states for talent.  All things being equal, I’d rather work with and follow either the “likeable stars” or “lovable fools”³.  Be well…..

Technorati Tags: Envisia Learning, Envisia, emotional intelligence, social competency, competent jerks, leadership, likeable stars, loveable fools, MSCEIT, Emotional Intelligence View 360, Daniel Goleman, Peter Salovey, Rueben Bar-On, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack

1. Nowack, K. (2007). It’s Not How Smart You Are But How Your Are Smart. Talent Management, 3 (10) p. 10 [↩]
2. Van Rooy, D.L. & Viswesvaran, C. (2004). Emotional intelligence: A meta-analytic investigation of predictive validity and nomological net, Journal of Vocational Behavior , 65, 71-95 [↩]
3. Casciaro & Lobo (June 2005). Competent Jerks, Lovable Fools and the Formation of Social Networks. Harvard Business Review, 82, 92-100 [↩]

“I feel my best when I’m happy.” 

Winona Ryder

Any guess what medical condition or health risk is the most costly to employers?  If you guessed stress, smoking, obesity, inactivity or diabetes you are way off the mark.  In fact, the most costly is depression¹.

Depression takes a pretty heavy toll on the U.S. workplace, affecting about 6 percent of employees each year and costing over $30 billion annually in lost productivity and absenteeism.

In a recent study in the Journal of American Medical Association, researchers reported on how a telephone treatment program had a substantial impact on cost savings, return to work and minimizing the length of the depressive symptoms compared toa a control group².

The study involved 604  workers at 16 large U.S. companies and included included pilots, lawyers, bankers, truckers and janitors.  The study participants completed an online questionnaire that measured health risk factors including depression. Half of those identified were encouraged to seek a mental health specialist or contact their doctor.  The other group received cognitive behavioral therapy over the phone.

Employees who received the telephone intervention worked, on average, about two weeks more during the yearlong study than those in the control group and more workers in the intervention group were still employed at the end of the study. Finally, the intervention employees were almost 40 percent more likely to recover from depression during the yearlong study.

Preliminary cost savings from more hours worked averaged about $1,800 per employee compared to the program’s initial $100 to $400 per worker cost.

It would appear that work/life balance benefits, including mental health insurance, would be something that employers would see value given just how prevalent and devastating depression can be in the workplace (Clinical depression affects about 7% - 18% of the population on at least one occasion in their lives, before the age of 40).

Furthermore, recent research with 24,324 employed workers, suggests that increased levels of job strain and a lack of social support at work are associated with higher risk of depression³.  Here are some keys to identifying depression in bosses and co-workers:

SIGNS AND SYMPTOMS OF DEPRESSION

One of the following major elements are typically observed for at least 2 weeks to suggest that an employee is experiencing depression.  These include:

1. Depressed mood (feeling sad, helpless or hopeless etc.)

or

2. Loss of interest in normal daily activities (e.g., having little interest in activities you typically enjoy).

It is sufficient to have either of these symptoms in conjunction with five of a list of other symptoms over a two-week period. These include:

1. A decrease in amount of pleasure or interest in almost all daily activities.
2. Feelings of overwhelming sadness or inability to feel emotions.
3. Intense feelings of guilt, nervousness, helplessness, hopelessness, worthlessness, loneliness and/or anxiety
4. Disturbed sleep. Sleeping too much or having problems sleeping can be a sign you’re depressed. Waking in the middle of the night or early in the morning and not being able to get back to sleep are typical.
5. Trouble concentrating, maintaining focus or making decisions and have problems with memory.
6. Changes in appetite with weight loss or gain.
7. Agitation. You may seem restless, agitated, irritable and easily annoyed.
8. Fatigue (mental or physical) and loss of energy.
9. Low self-esteem. You feel worthless and have excessive guilt.
10. Less interest in sex. If you were sexually active before developing depression, you may notice a dramatic decrease in your level of interest in having sexual relations.
11. Recurrent thoughts of death, dying or suicide.
12. Feeling and/or fear of being abandoned by those close to you.

The good news is that depression is typically treatable and for employees, getting some help would appear to be a direct cost savings for employers…..Be well….

Technorati Tags: mental health, depression, worksite wellness, health promotion, leadership, engagement, productivity, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack

1. Goetzl, R. et al. (1988).  The relationship between modifiable health risk and health care expenditures: An analysis of the multi-employer HERO health risk and cost data base. JOEM, 40, 843-854 [↩]
2. Philip S. Wang, MD, DrPH, et al.  Telephone Screening, Outreach, and Care Management for Depressed Workers and Impact on Clinical and Work Productivity Outcomes: A Randomized Controlled Trial.  JAMA, 2007, 298(12), p. 1401-1411 [↩]
3. Emma K. Robertson Blackmore, Stephen A. Stansfeld, Iris Weller, Sarah Munce, Brandon M. Zagorski, and Donna E. Stewart (2007). Major Depressive Episodes and Work Stress: Results From a National Population Survey. American Journal of Public Health, Sep 2007; doi:10.2105/AJPH.2006.104406 [↩]

“It’s easy to quit smoking. I’ve done it hundreds of times.”  Mark Twain

Have you ever quit something because it was hard to do?

When I was growing up, quitting wasn’t really an option–even if the goals seemed unattainable (OK, I did quit a summar job umpiring little league baseball only after my parents watched a few of my games and agreed that competitive parents make everyone miserable).

I think most of us have had the old saying drilled into us, “If at first you don’t succeed….try giving up.”

What, that wasn’t it?  What about leaders who embark on courses that appears to every rational observer to be completely unattainable?  Should they persist or continue to pursue the goals?

If so, at what cost??

According to new research, quitting may be better for your health. Psychologist’s Gregory Miller and Carsten Wroshch have found that people who are able to throw feel comfortable quitting when faced with unattainable goals may have better mental and physical health than those who persevere and push themself to succeed¹.

The findings build on their previous research, which found that those persistent individuals experienced higher levels of an inflammatory protein called C-reactive protein (an indicator of stress) as well as increased cortisol.  They also reported lower psychological well being. On the surface, this might not seem like a big deal but inflammation appears to be an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease and other stress related conditions.

Contrary to what we might have been taught, it appears that it might be in our best interests to “cut our losses” in the face of unattainable goals and life challenges and actually disengage from the goal to ensure optimum well-being and potentially long-term health.  This apears to be true whether we are in unsatisfying long-term relationships, working for leaders who are toxic or targeting a goal that is beyond our skill and ability “set  points.”

So, any good things those who persist?  In other research Carsten and colleagues found that in the face of life challenge and disengaging from unattainable goals, those who redfined and set new goals were more likely to be able to buffer the negative emotions associated with failure.  Maybe “rebound” relationships and new entrepreneurial goals might actually serve to help us find closure to the past and re-engage us for future journeys².

I saw an interesting bumper sticker the other day related to this topic that read, “Rehab is for Quitters”   In my quest for that perfect Blob entry, I think I will quite while I am ahead…..Be well…

Technorati Tags: leadership, envisia, envisia learning, quitting, habits, c-reactive protein, inflammation, goal setting, engagement, coping, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack

1. Miller, G. & Wrosch, C. (2007). You’ve Gotta Know When to Fold ‘Em: Goal Disengagement and Systemic Inflammation in Adolescence. Psychological Science, 18 [↩]
2. Wrosch, C., Miller, G. E., Scheier, M. F., & *Brun de Pontet, S. (2007). Giving up on unattainable goals: Benefits for health? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 251-265 [↩]

“The mediocre teacher tells.  The good teacher explains.  The superior teacher demonstrates.  The great teacher inspires.” 

William A. Ward

Do MBA Professors Make Good Leaders?

Do MBA professors who teach about leadership and organizational development really understand how to manage talent in organizations?  Sure, some consult and most publish but are they really a role model for leadership–or should they be?

A new study by Jiang & Murphy analyzed the performance of 215 executives who were former business school professors¹.  Their results suggested that companies with former business school professors now as executives demonstrated significantly higher financial performancethan non-former professors as executives.  They didn’t find any differences in company performance between executives who were professors in the highest ranked business schools compared to those in non-ranked schools.

Do Family Problems of CEO’s Affect Company Performance?

A recent study suggests that there is a statistically significant link between CEO family deaths and the companies’ profitability over a decade².  These researcher identified 6,753 deaths occuring to CEOs and family members–1,015 corresponded to CEOs, 282 to children, 733 to partners/spouses, 1,364 to in-laws and 3,061 to parents.  A link between CEO family deaths and significant economic decline of the company (operating returns on assets) was statistically significant. The biggest effects were cases where the CEO had only a single child and the smallest effects were deaths of in-laws.

Do Leaders Who Spend for Luxury Good for Shareholders?

How does the personal spending of CEOs (real estate in particular) affect the economic performance of a company?  Professors David Yermack and Crocker Liu studied major real estate purchases of just about every top executive in the Standard & Poor’s 500 index³.  They found pretty convincing statistical evidence that the financial performance of companies decreases when CEOs purchzase large homes and real estate.  They suggest that these purchases are related to “executive entrenchment”and “foreshadowing poor future stock performance.”  The good news is that they didn’t find that buying a house near a golf course or the water matter had a statistically significant impact on financial performance.

I guess CEOs do matter in the performance of their company……Be well…..

Technorati Tags: teaching, MBA, shareholder return, CEO success, Envisia Learning, Envisia Tools, coaching, leadership, talent management, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack

1. Jiang, B. & Murphy, P. (2007). Do business school professors make good executive managers?.  The Academy of Management Perspectives.  21, 29-50 [↩]
2. Bennedsen, M., Perez-Ganzalez, F. & Wolfsenzon, D. (2007)  Do CEO’s Matter? [↩]
3. Liu, C. & Yermack, D (2007).  Where are the shareholder’s mansions?  CEO’s home purchases, stock sales and subsequent company performance [↩]

“When dealing with people, remember you are not dealing with creatures of logic, but creatures of emotion”  Dale Carnegie

Despite a lot of press about how bad moods at work can be attributed to leader’s behavior, there is little research to support this urban myth–until now.

We all know that leaders make a significant difference in talent enagement, retention and level of stress¹ but what are the effects of leaders on emotions at work?

Leaders always have a power differential that might influence the relationship they have with their talent. leaders have the ability to limit autonomy and decisional control that affects levels of stress in all employees.  They also provide evaluations of performance that truly affect pay, promotions and careers.

A recent study revealed ² that employees report that, on average, 20% of their interations with their managers are “negative.”  However, the effects of negative interactions with one’s manager on employee mood is 5 times the effects of positive interactions.  So even if 80% of the interactions are pretty positive, it’s the negative ones that have a potent and lasting impact on perceived stress on talent at all levels.

In a very recent longitudinal study from health care workers followed 4 times a day for 2 weeks, employees with managers high on a measure of “transformational leadership orientation” experienced significantly more positive emotions throughout the day.  More importantly, these positive emotions also had a “spill over” affect on customers and peers within their work group³. 

Leaders who have a “transformational” rather than transactional orientation to their approach to supervision and management focus less on short-term goals and more about the needs of talent translating into enhanced engagement and connection to the vision of the organization.  In three unpublished studies utilizing our own measures of emotional intelligence, leaders who are charcterized as being higher on EI also are signifcantly higher on all scales of several well known measures of transformational leadership (e.g., MLQ; Avolio & Bass).

Taken together, these studies really demonstrate just how powerful leaders have on the emotions of employees. The positive emotions generated by emotionally intelligent leaders with a transformational orientation apparently have the potential to affect both engagement of talent and their behavior with internal/external customers.
As Daniel Goleman reminds us, “the emotional brain responds more quickly than the thinking brain.” I guess that’s why leaders play such an important role in employee’s emotional experiences at work.

It looks like the emotional intelligence of leaders is in fact pretty important and their impact on employee morale goes far beyond just the emotional “contagion” process….Be well……

Technorati Tags: surveys, Envisia, Envisia Learning, emotions, leadership, transformational leadership, positive supervisory interactions, morale, climate, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack

1. Nowack, K. (2005). Leadership, Emotional Intelligence and Employee Engagement: Creating a Psychologically Healthy Workplace. Unpublished manuscript [↩]
2. Miner, A., Glomb, T. & Hulin, C. (2005). Experience sampling mood and its correlates at work.  Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78-171-193 [↩]
3. Bono, J., Foldes, H., Vinson, G., & Muros, J. (2007).  Workplace emotions: The role of supervision and leadership.  Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1357-1367 [↩]

“I told my psychiatrist that everyone hates me. He said I was being ridiculous — everyone hasn’t met me yet.”

Rodney Dangerfield

Being a leader can be a lonely place.  The higher you go in an organization the least likely you are to have colleagues and reports provide you with honest and candid feedback about your behavior.  How many of us of heard the refrain, “another great meeting Lou” only to wander out the door muttering to ourselves just how much a waste a time the meeting actually was.

Leaders also seem to be high in self-delusion (no research has looked at how many leaders still have “imaginery friends”).  In a recent study reported in Harvard Business Review, CEOs seem to have unrealistically optimistic perceptions about several aspects of their top team’s performance.  In this study, CEOs reported providing signicantly higher effective direction for their team or believed that team members are less interested in promoting themselves than caring more about team interests than their direct reports¹.

What exactly do relationships at work do for talent? Do close relationships with one’s boss and colleagues have any impact on engagement and productivity? Some recent research suggests the following:

1. Close relationships at work boost employee satisfaction by 50 percent
2. When employees have close friendships with their bosses, they are more than twice as likely to be satisfied with their jobs
3. People who have a best friend at work are seven times more likely to be engaged in their work (as well as less accidents, more engaged customers and more creative)

These are some of the findings Tom Rath reports in his book,  “Vital Friends: The People You Can’t Afford to Live Without.”  Rath draws on more than 5 million interviews conducted by the research and polling organization.

There is even more convincing evidence about the role of social support in physical health and psychological well-being. In research using our own social support questionnaire, individuals reporting higher perceived availability, use and satisfaction report:

1. Less inflammation measured as C-Reative Protein–a new cardiovascular health risk marker
2. Enhanced immunity².
3. Less burnout in professional working women–lower depersonalization and higher personal accomplishment³.

In fact a recent survey of over 15,670 employees in diverse industries by Career Systems International, the third most important retention driver was having strong relationships and working with great people (42%).  Only having stimulating/exciting work (48%) and having an opportunity to grow and develop (42.9%) were rated higher. 

Despite the challenges and problems in both conceptualizing social support, social integration and networking by researchers and practioners, having people in our lives to use for emotional, functional and intellectual support appears to be a protective factor in health and one that simultaneously contributes to increase productivity.

Finding and developing meaningful relationships are always a challenge–Recent statistics suggest that 50% of all marriages will end in divorce. Great leaders find a way to both stimulate inidividual engagment of their talent and build high performing teams who work toward a common vision of a better tomorrow.

Maybe the Youngbloods were right after all….”C’mon people now, Smile on your brother, Ev’rybody get together, Try and love one another right now, Right now…”

Right now!  Be well……

Technorati Tags: surveys, Envisia, Envisia learing, retention, talent management, engagemen, job satisfaction, worklife balance, social integration, social support, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack

1. Rosen, R. & Adair, F. (2007).  CEOs Misperceive Top Team’s Performance.  Harvard Business Review, September 2007 [↩]
2. Schwartz, G.E., Schwartz, J.I., Nowack, K.M., & Eichling, P.S. (1992). Changes in perceived stress and social support over time are related to changes in immune function. University of Arizona and Canyon Ranch. Unpublished manuscript [↩]
3. Nowack, K. and Pentkowski, A. (1994). Lifestyle habits, substance use, and predictors of job burnout in professional working women. Work and Stress, 8, 19-35 [↩]

“The secret of success is sincerity.  Once you can fake that you’ve got it made.”                    

Jean Giraudoux

What would you say if you knew that your feedback to a person could influence and motivate this individual to make a $3 million gift or donation to a charity or non-profit organization?

Would you be brutally honest and share your opinion or would you be politically conservative and just assume your individual feedback won’t matter that much in actually changing the behavior of someone that has a long track record of a leadership style or approach that most everyone recognizes.

Ahh…the dilemma of upward feedback!  As a point of disclosure, Envisia Learning is in the business of providing multi-rater feedback assessments to leaders with two goals in mind: 1) Helping leaders see the world through the eyes of others whether accurate or not; and 2) Helping motivate leaders to leverage their “signature strengths” or focusing on areas of potential development.

One question that comes up from raters in these 360-degree feedback processes is whether they can be “totally honest” in completing the online questionnaires.  I’m sure in the back of their minds they are also questioning just how much this feedback will really make a difference.

On any 360 project for an organization we probably get at least one leader’s direct report, peer or colleague contacting us and asking if they need to complete the online questionnaire and just how “anonymous” their feedback is.  We try to explain that leaders don’t typically wake up each morning and spontaneously try out new behaviors and change for the sake of change.  We try to assure raters their comments and ratings will be bundled with others who have been invited by their leader for feedback and that without takiing a risk to share their observations, suggestions and feedback what they will see is basically more of the same.  Some of the less paranoid hang up and complete the online questionnaires and the others we never hear from again.

Perhaps some raters don’t believe that leaders will change anyway (it doesn’t matter if the cause is motivation or ability–the outcome is the same)

Perhaps some raters are justified in not participating knowing that their boss will actually try hard to identify them and if successful will punish them for their candor.

Perhaps some raters are just shy to describe reality from their frame of reference.

Just recently the chancellor of the University of Nevada, Reno (UNR), says he and his family will no longer be considering donating a $3 million gift to the school when he retires after a regent’s negative comments in his job performance evaluation.

The Chancellor said he had talked to the UNR system wide President this year about making a sizeable donation to help build a new math and science center on campus.  The chancellor abruptly changed his mind and informed the school system that he would no longer follow up on this pledge after a regent questioned his integrity.

In a written evaluation by one of the regents who have a role to provide appraisal comments to the Chancellor, this regent wrote that the Chancellor’s claims of being “totally honest and known for his integrity” were false.

The regent went on to write about the Chancellor that “he is known primarily as a self-absorbed, self-indulgent bully and tyrant, given to rashly going off at little or no provocation.”

OK, coaches….how do you handle a feedback meeting when you come across this type of written comment within their report?  Or, do you remove it knowing it will realistically not met with much of an open and enthusiastic response given just how non-evaluative and behavioral it was? 

Or do you try to teach the concept of “feedforward” popularized by coaching guru Marshall Goldsmith and help both the regent (and other future raters) to focus on things that are changeable and make them future oriented?

As George Carlin once said, “Honesty may be the best policy, but it’s important to remember that apparently, by elimination, dishonesty is the second best policy”…..Be well….

Technorati Tags: coaching, feedforward, Marshall Goldsmith, feedback, multi-rater feedback, 360 degree feedback, kenneth nowack, envisia, ken nowack, envisia learning

Without enough sleep, we all become tall two-year-olds.”  

JoJo Jensen

I woke up tired this morning and know exactly why…I didn’t get both enough sleep and good quality sleep last night.  Good thing I’m not making executive decisions, flying the space shuttle or doing delicate brain surgery not to mention being the third link in the security at one of our nuclear power plants.

It seems that just recently a federal  inspector found an armed guard asleep at a gate inside the Indian Point nuclear power plant located about 35 miles north of New York City.   A federal inspector actually found the 5 year veteran employee and tried for 2 minutes to wake the person before the guard “stood up and opened his eyes.”   It must have been one of those dreams you really want to stay in!  It seems the practice at this facility was to rotate guards during their 12-hour shifts to keep them alert (this guard had already worked two other posts before hitting NREM/REM land). 

Well, maybe you won’t be surprised that in a recent study of US Workers, the prevalence of fatigue (lack of sleep being one of the major contributors) was 37.9%.  Fatigue, when present, is associated with a threefold increase, on average, in the proportation of workers with condition-specific lost productive time¹.

In fact the top three causes of lost work time by employees in the US based on research from Ron Kessler at the Harvard Medical School (due to both absence and presenteeism) include: Sleep disorders, depression and fatigue (these three each account for approximately 425-490 lost workdays per 100 full time employees).

Even the prestigious Harvard Business Review last year (October 2006) conducted an interview with sleep expert Dr. Charles Czeisler on the relationship between lack of sleep, poor performance and impaired decision making and judgment.

My colleague, friend and personal sleep expert Dr. Mark Rosekind founder of Alertness Solutions has found that even two hours less sleep than you need at night (that certainly can vary!) has the following results:

1. Degrading critical judgment and decision making by 50%

2. Diminishing memory by 20%

3. Interfering with communication skills by 30%

4. Affecting mood by 100% (good mood goes down and bad mood goes up)

Well, any new parent can attest to these findings….Well, if we look at some provocative new research maybe lack of sleep does indeed have an upside. According to data from the Cancer Prevention Study II, individuals who average seven hours of sleep each night have a lower mortality rate than do those who sleep eight hours or more². These findings were also consistent with earlier research suggesting that the lowest mortality was again at seven hours of total sleep, with some increase in mortality associated with short sleep and an even steeper increase with long sleep.

Good news indeed given that the average American on weekdays sleeps about six and one-half hours.

All obvious you say?  Don’t blame me then when you wind up dreaming about this blog tonight.
zzzzzzzzzzzend….Be well….

Technorati Tags: insomnia, sleep, fatigue, depression, sleep disorders, fatigue countermeasures, REM, NREM, circadian rhythms, stress, dreams, dreaming, health, job burnout, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack

1. Ricci, J., Chee, Lorandeau, A. & Berger, J. (2007). Fatigue in the U.S. Workforce: Prevalence and Implications for Lost Productive Work Time.  Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 49 (1), 1-10 [↩]
2. Kripke DF, Garfinkel L, Wingard DL, et al. Mortality associated with sleep duration and insomnia. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2002;59:131-136 [↩]

“A telephone survey says that 51 percent of college students drink until they pass out at least once a month. The other 49 percent didn’t answer the phone.”  

Craig Kilborn

I’ve been interested in employee and organizational surveys for a long time.  I have to share with you that I am often puzzled interpreting and understanding what the results from recent popular surveys are actually telling us¹. They sure seem to be the latest PR vehicle of consulting firms looking to create some ”buzz” in the market. 

I really do like surveys but so often I really can’t interpret what is being reported because the “fine print” about them (things look closer than they really are in the mirror) is often hard to access or ever find.  I sure wish it was  easy to find the answers to these questions I often have about published survey results:

1. What questions were actually asked?
2. Who actually were asked?
3. Are the people being asked like anyone else?
4. What’s the motivation of the company conducting the survey?
5. Is the sampling adequate to ensure statistical confidence in the results?
6. How many responded compared to how many were asked to reply?
7. Were differences by demographic groups statistically significant or is the gap just interesting?
8. Are the survey findings cross-sectional or longitudinal?
9. What was the survey response scale that was used?
10. Where did the questions come from?

I really like surveys but it seems that just about every business and psychology magazine I subscribe to now has a “special section” devoted to survey results.  Just because mind readers charge me half-price doesn’t totally explain how often I am left totally confused by the results from all the recent polls, surveys and best selling books based on their own questionnaires that appear in the press each day.

OK, I’m confused–What Motivates Employees?

In a recent survey by my colleague Beverly Kaye of Career Systems International on retention drivers, she found in an analysis of over 15,000 employees in diverse industries that the most critical factors included: 1) Challenging work (48%); 2) Career Growth (43%); and 3) Relationships (38%).  Pay was up there as well but these findings really hammer home the shift from “job security” to the new paradigm of “employability security.”  Or so I thought until I read the most recent survey from the Sociey for Human Resource Management (SHRM).

In the 2007 SHRM Job Satisfaction survey results just published, employees said they want most of all from work: 1) Salary; 2) Benefits; 3) Job Security; 4) Work/Life Balance and 5) Better Communication to Employees from Management.  These findings didn’t even seem to match what human resources practioners thought employees would say was most satisfying to them.  The practitioners polled believed that the “top five” motivators would be: 1) Relationship with One’s Manager; 2) Pay; 3) Recognition; 4) Company Benefits; and 5) Better Communication to Employees from Management.

SHRM did try to explain the surprising finding of “job security” rated as high as the third most important job satisfaction driver by saying that “this aspect was less important for employees with two years or less of job tenure compared with employees having six to 10 years of tenure.”  If things aren’t still clear about these survey results, maybe Paul Simon’s lyrics to his song “50 Ways to Leave Your Lover” will be a good explanation.

OK, I’m confused–Do employees leave companies or bad bosses?

In a recent 2007 World of Work survey by Randstad, one-third (33%) of employees thought it was a good time to look for new job opportunities in 2003 and more than half (55%) feel it’s a good time to start looking in the most recent analysis.

In another poll conducted by the Wall Street Journal and Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), 78% of employees reported they were likely to start a new job search. Approximately 65 percent of senior executives reported currently seeking new  employment versus 45% of middle managers. Good to see executives leaving their own leadership!

OK, I’m confused–Just how Stressed are Employees?

The same 2007 Randstad Work Survey suggested that slightly more than one-quarter of all employers work fewer than 40 hours a week with 65% averaging between 41 to 60 hours. If you ask supervisors and managers, 9% said they definitely work more than 61 hours per week.

Our own research at Envisia Learning suggests that it might depend on just how you ask the work stress question².  In an earlier set of engagement surveys with diverse clients we consistently found that approximately 65% of all employee reported “I often feel pressure and stress on my job” and 40% reported they disagree or strongly disagree with the statement “The amount of pressue and stress on my job is reasonable and rarely excessive.”  Finally, a recent national survey by the UK based Health and Safety Executive reported that 20% of all employees there report their “job is very or extremely stressful.” 

In a recent poll of my immediate family members, a Starbucks employee and a US Postal carrier, 100% reported a high level of work and life stress and all reported seeking greater “balance” with family and job tasks.

OK, I’m confused–should I still be taking my vitamin E for cardioprotection?  Survey says…..Be well….

Technorati Tags: surveys, Envisia, Envisia learing, retention, talent management, engagement surveys, job satisfaction, worklife balance, job stress, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack

1. Nowack, K. (1990). Getting Them Out and Getting Them Back. Training and Development,  44, 82-85 [↩]
2. Nowack, K. (2006). Optimising Employee Resilience: Coaching to Help Individuals Modify Lifestyle. Stress News, International Journal of Stress Management, Volume 18, 9-12 [↩]