Tag Archives: D. L.

If you’re trying to cut costs, don’t cut the engagement survey

Reply

Topic: Engagement, Job Satisfaction, Surveys
Publication: Journal of Business and Psychology (JUN 2011)
Article: Measuring employee engagement during a financial downturn: Business imperative or nuisance?
Authors: Van Rooy, D. L., Whitman, D. S., Hart, D., & Caleo, S.
Reviewed by: Alexandra Rechlin

In these difficult economic times, organizations have been forced to cut costs. One way in which organizations are saving money is by reducing the use of employee surveys, but Van Rooy et al. (2011) contend that these surveys are valuable and should not be cut. The authors argue that measuring engagement is important because engagement has been shown to be related to many important business outcomes, such as turnover, efficiency, and performance. By researching engagement, an organization can better protect its current talent and prepare itself to attract talent that may leave other organizations.

The authors provide advice for practitioners who want to measure engagement but are looking to save money. Re-administering a survey without making changes from the previous administration will reduce costs, though it will present challenges if edits need to be made. Items should be directly actionable, so that responses to the items can be used to make real changes.

Continue reading →

Building successful and sustainable HR interventions

2

Topic: Change Management, Strategic HR
Publication: Journal of Business and Psychology (JUN 2011)
Article: HR interventions that go viral
Authors: Yost, P. R., McLellan, J. R., Ecker, D. L., Chang, G. C., Hereford, J. M., Roenicke, C. C., Town, J. B., & Winberg, Y. L.
Reviewed by: Alexandra Rechlin

Why do some HR interventions fail while others succeed? In this article, Yost et al. (2011) attempt to answer that question by using three different methods: a literature review, a case study, and interviews with senior I/O and HR professionals. The authors provided a case study of a successful HR intervention. They noted five important characteristics of the intervention:

  1. It was strategic. Resources and tools were written in alignment with business strategy.
  2. It was systemic. The intervention complemented and enhanced other company initiatives.
  3. It was simple. Resources and tools were simple, easy to read and understand, and written in the language of business leaders (not that of HR).
  4. It was sustainable. The intervention was created with the explicit intent to sustain it for a long time.
  5. It was sneeze-able. It was designed to be interesting and passed on to others.

The authors also reviewed the literature and interviewed 16 senior I/O and HR professionals about both successful and unsuccessful HR interventions.

Continue reading →