September 26, 2024 • 48 mins
Andy Goram sits down with Nick Court, founder and CEO of The People Experience Hub, to tackle a bold question: "Are we measuring employee engagement all wrong?" As organisations pour time and resources into engagement surveys and scores, Nick challenges the effectiveness of these traditional methods and suggests that we’ve been missing the mark.
Andy and Nick dive deep into the flaws of current engagement measurement practices, exploring why chasing numbers might actually be detracting from what truly drives a thriving workplace. Nick introduces the PX3 model, a revolutionary approach that goes beyond surface-level metrics to uncover the real factors that influence employee experience and retention.
----more----
Key Takeaways- Traditional employee engagement metrics are flawed. It's more nuanced.
- Effective employee engagement measurement should know, "What makes an employee engaged here."
- The Px3 Think Feel Do model goes beyond a score and uncovers what needs focus and why
- Internal benchmarks are far more valuable than external comparisons.
----more----
Key MomentsThe key moments in this episode are:
00:00:10 - Is chasing employee engagement scores leading us astray? 00:06:11 - What does true employee engagement look like in your organisation? 00:09:07 - The dangers of focusing solely on engagement scores 00:14:04 - Why a singular engagement metric may be misleading 00:17:51 - Rethinking net promoter scores for employee engagement 00:23:14 - Introducing the Px3 model - a new approach to measuring employee experience 00:28:56 - Why outcomes matter more than engagement scores 00:35:18 - Predictive analytics are the future of employee engagement measurement 00:41:24 - The case for internal benchmarks over external comparisons 00:42:53 - How to create a culture where employees thrive
----more----
Join The Conversation Find Andy Goram on LinkedIn here Listen to the Podcast on YouTube here Follow the Podcast on Instagram here Follow the Podcast on Twitter here Follow the Podcast on Facebook here Check out the Bizjuicer website here Get a free consultation with Andy here Check out the Bizjuicer blog here Download the podcast here ----more---- Useful Links Follow Nick Court on LinkedIn here Follow the PxHub on LinkedIn here Find the PxHub website here ----more---- Full Episode TranscriptGet the full transcript of the episode here
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Hello and welcome to Sticky from the
(00:13):
Inside, the employee engagement podcast
that looks at how to build stickier,
competition,-smashing, consistently
successful organisations from the inside
out. I'm your host, Andy Goram, and I'm
on a mission to help more businesses turn
the lights on behind the eyes of their
employees, light the fires within them,
and create tons more success for everyone.
(00:39):
This podcast is for all those who believe
that's something worth going after and
would like a little help and guidance in
achieving that. Each episode, we dive into
the topics that can help create what I
call stickier businesses. The sort of
businesses where people thrive and love to
work, and where more customers stay with
you and recommend you to others because
(01:01):
they love what you do and why you do it.
So if you want to take the tricky out of
being sticky, listen on. Okay then. Today
I am shaking things up a bit with a
conversation that might just challenge
everything you think you know about
employee engagement. If you've ever been
(01:22):
involved in an employee engagement survey,
you know the drill. Numbers go up,
celebrations ensue, numbers dip, and it's
time to scramble for a fix. They're now
bored of bean bags. We clearly need more
fruit and a new coffee machine. But here's
the thing. What if chasing that elusive
engagement score is actually taking us in
(01:42):
entirely the wrong direction? My guest
today is Nick Court, the founder and CEO
of the People Experience Hub, and he's
here to tell us why 2024 needs to be the
year we go beyond the score. Nick believes
that we've been so focused on those
numbers that we've lost sight of what
really matters, understanding their
(02:04):
behaviors, experiences, and feelings that
truly shape workplace culture. So let's
get real. Are we simply ticking boxes and
patting ourselves on the back for a high
score? Or are we digging deeper to
understand what's really driving, saving
or stalling our people's engagement? And
is even that the thing that we should be
(02:25):
measuring? What, have we been doing it
wrong all along? In today's episode, I
hope we'll explore these questions and
more. We'll unpack why the traditional
approach to employee engagement might not
be moving the dial like we think it is.
After all, globally, engagement numbers
haven't budged significantly in decades.
Despite all the surveys, despite all the
(02:45):
money that's spent on it's been, all the
efforts. There's something somewhere isn't
right. So what does it take to design to
grow and maintain a workforce that's not
just engaged but really thriving? How do
we know what the key elements are to
achieving that outcome and how we should
we measure our progress in working our way
(03:07):
towards that. So buckle up as I think
Nick's about to flip the script on
everything we thought we knew about
engagement. Welcome to the show, Nick.
Randy, welcome for having me on here. It's
exciting. I'm excited and it is exciting.
So, yeah, looking forward to jumping into
this. Me too, mate. Me too. Now, before we
start, just so everybody gets on the same
page, just do us a favor, my friend. Just
(03:29):
give us a little bit of insight into you
and your background and perhaps the
origins of the people experience hub. I
came into the world of HR for a slightly
different route to others, which is I came
in from an operational background and I,
more than that, I came in from actually
from a trade union background. So I
started my life working in a warehouse and
(03:51):
I was a trade union rep for years and then
I was a trade union. Fisher was a branch
chair. So I got into the concept of how we
should be treating people at work through,
number one, experiencing it, and number
two, supporting trade union members and
Tesco employees. So I very much came into
it that way. And I had the opportunity to
(04:12):
go into payroll team. The HR director at
the time said to me, you know more about
our policies and procedures than so many
other people do in the organization. And
payroll is simply taking those policies
and procedures and turning them into
transactional elements like pay. So I did
that, found out I had an affinity for
payroll, affinity for HR systems, and from
(04:36):
there I progressed. I then left and went
for Associated british foods. So I got
from retail into food manufacturing, where
I looked after HR, shared services, reward
benefits, global mobility, went from there
to Carlsberg. Then I realized I've gone
from a 400,000 person company to a large
(04:59):
company to a 1800 person company. And I
decided to set out on my own, went out and
did a consultancy role, and then that's
where the people experience hub concept
came along. I sat with my business
partner, Ben at the time. We were looking
at, you know, what we felt was wrong in
the world and or wasn't quite working,
probably more than anything. And we said,
(05:20):
one of the things around colleague surveys
as people surveys is it feels a little bit
like tail wagging the dog. Like the
supplier of the survey is telling you how
to do it, telling you what the measure is
telling you the question to ask and not
really understand the experience. And my,
and that's where we went out to solve and
(05:42):
that's where the people experience hub was
born. Fantastic. And it's clearly doing
great stuff. You've just received a
finalist kind of nomination for the people
pioneers for 2024. Congratulations on
that. That's great. Culture pioneers. The
Culture Pioneers award is for brand. So
it's about, does our external brand and
(06:02):
our internal brand match up when we walk
the walk and talk the talk, do the two
things come together? So delighted to have
been a finalist for that. Oh, I think
that, say, do gap is so important when it
comes down to people and culture and
really, really delivering this kind of
thriving environment. We're hopefully
going to talk about today. Now, back early
(06:24):
in the day, I had your friend and
colleague Rob Robson come on and totally
blow my mind while asking him this very
simple question, which I'll ask to you,
which was a. From your perspective, Nick,
when we talk about employee engagement,
what are we referring to? So it's Rob.
(06:45):
And, you know, I'm going to be careful
here because I don't want to be. I don't
be competing against, you know, what. What
Rob does. Rob, you know, Rob is. Rob's far
more intelligent than I am. Okay? I'm a. I
feel my intelligence comes through my
feet. You know, it comes, like, where I
am, where I'm walking and all that stuff
and my life experience. So when I think
about employee engagement, I really. I
(07:08):
understand if I'm engaged in something,
right? I understand that. When I go into a
shop, am I more engaged in Coke or Pepsi?
Right? I know what I'm engaged in. I know
how I feel that day. And I think that we
can risk over complicating what is
effectively. What is engagement? The
(07:29):
answer is, well, what does an engaged
employee look like in your organization?
What does an engaged employee look like to
you? What does someone who is engaged,
what does their behavior look like? What
do you expect somebody who's engaged to
do? You expect them to be responding and
responsive. You expect them to advocate
and be advocating. You expect them to
(07:53):
align with what you're doing. And we got
to think that engagement ultimately is a
set of things, but ultimately, it's about
motivation. When I walk past three
restaurants on the high street, which is
the one I'm most engaged with, which is
the one that gives me a great experience,
and experience leads to engagement. So I'm
(08:14):
deliberately, by the way, keeping this
vague, because the problem of locking
engagement down to one thing and then
going at it means that we are going at a
social norm, and we are ignoring any
differences that there may be in the
world. And we are. When we go at a social
(08:36):
norm, think about what social normative
groups are. We end up at a risk of what is
employee engagement for white middle aged
men? And what we have to look at is an
engaged employee is likely to do the
following things. It's likely to behave
like this, and it's the behaviors we're
(08:56):
looking for. So I've deliberately not
answered your question. You have answered
my question. You've just done it
differently to Rob. Rob, you know, just
absolutely did my brain in, in a good way.
Yeah. And what you've done is you've
taught my language, Nick, which is
amazing. I'm not comfortable with. And
maybe this is the problem. I mean,
measurement is going to be at the heart of
(09:17):
what we end up talking about today,
because we can talk about alignment and we
can talk about behavior and we can talk
about differences. Somewhere in there,
organizations are trying to measure
something, and we, the fewer things we
measure, I guess the more comfortable we
feel. Oh, it's that thing. Right. But if
that is the case, what are we doing wrong
(09:38):
at the moment? Because I mentioned, and
depending which survey you look at,
numbers go up, numbers go down. I think
it's reasonably well understood that
globally, that number's been pretty
static, pretty stagnant right around
engagement. Organizations are different,
countries might be different. Globally,
it's not really changed much. So what's
(09:59):
wrong? What's happening with this
measurement thing? What are we doing
wrong? Nick? I think there's no harm in
having a concept of engagement and having
a concept of a number to help us
understand if we are heading in the right
direction. And I think ultimately that's
what's been lost. And if we were to go to
(10:19):
an organization, let's go. We'll go to
hello fresh Hellofresh. That has a huge
technology arm, a huge commercial business
arm, and then a huge production arm. And
you were to talk to them about what does
employee engagement look like? It must
look different in different parts of their
business. To then have an overarching
(10:43):
measure that tries to span all of that is
almost impossible just in one
organization. So what we see going wrong
is that theres a couple of things, I
think. So number one is chasing the
benchmark. So the benchmark becomes the
score, the score becomes the goal, and the
obsession on the goal becomes the driver
(11:04):
of behaviors. And if all you have to do is
increase your engagement score from 72% to
73%, then what will you do? And will you
do it in a sustainable way? And will you
do it in a way that is understood by
everybody? And will you declare that when
you get to 74%, because the benchmark
(11:26):
provided by the wisdom in the world, which
is the data that people have decided to
share, will you then stop? And ultimately,
you can't sit there and say, we're going
to design an experience that people are
going to interact with for 8 hours a day,
10 hours a day, 12 hours a day, and do it
(11:47):
in the same way that a retailer may design
an experience for somebody who's going to
come in once a week, it's different. So
that whole customer experience and
employee experience, we can learn so much,
we can learn a bit. But designing
something that's going to take a third of
people's lives and be so influential is
something you can't stop when you hit the
goal. And I think that's one of the big
(12:10):
problems, is employee engagement. Creates
an employee engagement benchmark, which
locks people into a concept of engagement,
which locks people into six questions that
are the engagement questions. And then we
chase the benchmark. And what we do is we
limit ourselves on things that are not
engagement. So what does an organization
want? Employee engagement. Of course it
(12:32):
wants employee engagement. That's a nice
measure of are people motivated? Are they
engaged? They want their people to be
well, right? So well being must be a
measure of an outcome. They want people to
be innovative, they want people to be
ready for change. They want people to be
motivated and motivational. They want
(12:53):
people to be productive. So there's so
many things that they want for their
people and of their people, that
engagement can only ever be a small subset
of that. So there's a real risk that says,
when engagement is the only score you're
chasing or the only goal in town, you're
racing to the benchmark and you're
comparing yourself, hello, fresh is
(13:14):
comparing themselves to Sainsbury's and
comparing themselves to Barclays and
comparing themselves to different
industries, across different groups with
different experiences. When, if you just
ask the question, what do we want of our
people? What do we need to give them? What
does an engaged person look here, look
like here? And what are our expectations
(13:39):
of outcomes like innovation, change,
readiness, and well being, you start
asking far broader questions. And, you
know, if my original answer to what is
engagement is vague, that's because
engagement is vague. It's nebulous as a
concept. And therefore, trying to chase it
(14:00):
sometimes can feel like you're batting
away at clouds and mist, especially if
you're chasing. The wrong things,
especially if we're going down the wrong
paths, if the information or the data
we're getting, I guess, isn't nuanced
enough, isn't asking the right sort of
questions, to get the outcomes that we're
looking for and that people need. And I
think also this point and the dangers,
(14:21):
perhaps discuss a bit more about the
dangers of being obsessed with a score is
that this isn't like a PlayStation game. I
don't, I don't think that I've got to 75.
Therefore I've completed engagement.
Right. What's the next game? Because this
is an ongoing quest, right? Involving in
(14:42):
culture. It's a never ending thing. You've
constantly got to work on it, to keep it,
to maintain it, to grow it. People come in
and people go, things change, dynamics
change. Right? It's, it's a, it's a living
beast. So even the context of engagement
must change over time with business focus
changing and industry changing. Yeah, it
(15:02):
has to. When you look at the most
innovative organizations or innovative
brands, what do they do? They buck the
trends. They go different, they do more,
and they obviously need to understand what
they want to be. But if your focus is only
on engagement, then your focus can't also
be on being a better business, on helping
(15:25):
our people create a better business for us
and our customers and our stakeholders.
And I think there's a broader set that
needs to be looked at here. And ultimately
we can also get into the concept that is
to HR. Have a seat at the table. So where
does employee engagement sit within an
organization? Typically, the transactional
(15:47):
running of surveys and starting to pull
strategy sits within the HR of the people
teams. My experience when we have stood up
in front of boards and we talk about
engagement because it is such a nebulous
concept, because no one can say, when you
do this, you get that it's about, well, we
must increase our engagement score. And
(16:09):
it's like, well, what's important to you?
And when you say to a CEO or a CFO, we can
improve retention, we can increase
productivity, we can improve motivation,
we can increase advocacy. Your promoters
and your internal organization, it's more
solid. But our obsession with wrapping all
(16:29):
of that up into one concept of engagement
has become quite high. And I think if
organizations were focused on designing
the experience for our people to deliver
for our customers and consumers, you end
up with the 1950s thinking of the service
profit chain. There's a bit of me still
(16:52):
rose tinted glasses that just loves the
concept of the service profit chain.
Right? I think it lives and breathes and
we can overcomplicate things or try and
change them. That's still at the heart of
it all. Happy employees, happy customers,
happy shareholders. Off we go. All good. I
wonder whether some of this, some of this
(17:13):
measurement issue is a quest for
simplicity driven by communication above
all else rather than actual outcome. So we
need to be able to tell people what, how
engaged people are in this business.
Therefore we need something really
simplistic and the easier we can make it
to understand as in a number well then
(17:36):
more people will comprehend what is the
reality is something that doesn't do
anything that probably has just more
questions. Maybe even something like net
promoter score is like the devil, right?
We've got this one number. It tells us
everything. What on earth does it tell us?
I mean it's a great example because the
guy who invented NP's, the net promoter
(17:58):
score, regrets doing it. He's publicly
came out and said he regrets creating the
one score you need to manage your
business, which is net promoter. Would I
recommend this company to my friends and
family? And that means from a consumer
perspective it wasn't long before people
co opted that into the enPs, the employee
(18:19):
net promoter score. And so it's like, okay
so you are Nike with millions of consumers
and millions of data points and you want
to get one question but you employ 1000
people but you now want to try and take
that same concept to a thousand people.
Would I recommend this as a great place to
work? And are you a detractor or a
promoter? When you look at McKinsey you
(18:41):
look at someone else talking about NP's.
The one danger of NP's is it asks what
would you do? Not what did you do? What do
you do? What would you do? It's a
measurement of your perceived intent to do
something, not your opportunity to do it.
So it doesn't ask you do you have the
(19:02):
opportunity to recommend someone to this
brand or this organization? It says would
you if you had the opportunity, not did
you and have you in the last however long
and then takes you away from the rest of
your business. So when you see businesses
that have struggled who have these
measurements they don't understand but we
(19:23):
have a good NP's or a good enps and it's
like. But that's not the only thing. Yeah,
you can't measure every part of your
people, you know, and your people KPI's
based on whether they would recommend you
as a great place to work. There's a number
of pitfalls there I think with the
measures. Look, I've, I've used emps. You
(19:44):
know, I'm not, I'm not here trying to sort
of like say I haven't. I have, but I guess
I've seen the light on those sort of
things. But also like as a, if I'm doing
facilitation work, right, let's say I'm
doing, I'm running a leadership
development course. There's a survey at
the end of that program for all the
delegates to take and, you know, was it
engaging and fun and all those sort of
good questions are coming through. I know
(20:06):
if I've had a really challenging group and
I've had to challenge them to get them to
think, to move forward, I know more often
than not in the moment my scores may be
lower than I would like because it's been
an uncomfortable session. However, I also
know that six months down the line I get
emails from people saying, you know, that
(20:27):
time I didn't like you very much for
pushing me. Actually, I'm now kind of
seeing why. You and I've recommended you
to ten people who revived that. It would
be great. And I think this is the
important thing when we talk about
something like NP's is the difference
between the question you're asking and the
measurement you apply. And this is which
wells back into this, which is I don't
(20:48):
have any problem at all with asking
somebody, would you recommend us to your
friends and family as a great place to
work? If we had a vacancy, would you refer
your friend to come and work here? Its a
great indicator of engagement. Its a great
measure of that. But I have a real issue
is probably this eleven point scale that
says, are you a detractor or a promoter?
(21:10):
Is it plus 50 -100 because it gives no one
anything to go on. You know, the third
thing is it cannot be your only score. My
experience of the training that I had with
you, the environment was one that was
conducive to learning to change. The
materials I had that I had to work with
(21:31):
enabled me to take part. The preemptive
work enabled me to understand what's
happening. Was it uncomfortable? Maybe.
Would I recommend you ask me again in six
months? Yeah, you know, all of that stuff
is good, but you got to look at it in the
round to understand the full experience.
Absolutely. And so that's, that's what I
(21:51):
want to kind of drill into. So we've
talked about outcomes and trying to
understand the various outcomes or even
the specific outcomes that we're looking
for to sort of see, well, is the business
in the people inside the business
thriving? Have they got an opportunity to
do their best thing, bring them, bring
their best self, share their efforts, you
(22:12):
know, contribute in some sort of way? So
in the quest for simplicity, maybe we've
gone down the wrong path. Right. Maybe
we're starting to look at okay measures,
not the most useful measures, because we
haven't really thought about the outcomes
that we're looking for. And so maybe.
Maybe we're doing. Employing agent wrong.
(22:32):
You know, maybe we've led down a garden
path, and if we. We follow the wrong
scores and the wrong measures, we're going
to do the wrong things. And so, in the
work that you're doing, which, from what I
have seen out there, is different. And
even back in the day, when I talked to
rob, this stuff was being thought about
(22:54):
and trialed and tested, but now it's out
there. I want you to tell us about the.
The PX three model, the sort of think,
feel, do model. What is it? What is it
attempting to do, and how does it work? PX
(23:15):
three looks effectively at broader
concepts than engagement. So it looks at
outcomes, people outcomes. So, if you
think about the three levels we're looking
at, I'm going to go 3213 is people
outcomes. And, of course, you can have a
rolled up engagement measure in that. But
ultimately, we're looking at things like
(23:37):
outcomes like retention, intention to
stay, motivation, well being. Can people
be well in your organization? And
innovation, readiness for change. So, all
of these things are outcomes. And when we
think about outcomes, you got to think
about the things that are desirable for
(23:59):
your people as an organization, because,
you know, when these outcomes happen, you
do well as an organization, so you're
winning. And the outcomes you want for
your people because you care about them,
you want your people to be well, not just
because when they're well, they'll do more
productive work, because, you know, that
that's ultimately might be someone feels
like that organization, but, you know, a
(24:21):
caring organization wants their people to
be well. They want their people to be
motivated. They want their people to be
ready for any change that's coming. Yeah.
So there's a balance there between
organizational needs and organizational
wants for their people. So there's a
balance there. Number three. Number two is
the felt experience that comes under feel.
So where number three is outcomes, which
(24:43):
is what are people likely to do? Do.
Number two is the felt experience. And
this is how do people feel? And here,
where we. What we put in here are things
like the feelings of autonomy, belonging,
the feelings of connection and enjoyment.
(25:03):
So if you think about these as meeting the
fundamental human needs that we have. And
number one is the perceived environment.
So this is the think part of think, Phil,
do. And the perceived environment is how
people perceive the environment around
them. I think. I believe that my manager
(25:24):
cares for me. I think that the
communications are adequate. I think that
I receive recognition. I think as an
organization, we're doing everything we
can to be sustainable. And what this
allows us to do is it allows us to take a
concept then, which is we can draw a line
between those. Because the only thing you
(25:45):
can do as an organization is tackle the
area of think. So when you look at that
and you go, how do people think is the
only area that I can influence? You can't
tell people how to feel, and you can't
demand an outcome for long. Maybe you can
demand an outcome in a real controlled
(26:05):
environment. Not sustainably, no. So the
two things you can't control, we measure
and we understand, and then we measure the
thing you can control, because that's the
lever you can pull. So when we say, think,
feel, do, we're now able to do that. And
why did we go down this route? Rather than
a classic way of measuring engagement or
(26:26):
looking at standard approaches, which are
all fine as well in their own space, it
was because it gave us richer. So we see
this as the next evolution. We see this as
the model, the framework of engagement
plus one, you know, and if you look at
what other people are doing, what we saw
(26:48):
was you'd end up with this huge list that
said, people who feel they belong are
twelve times more likely to be engaged.
Okay? I don't, I can't tell them how to, I
can't demand they feel that they belong. I
can't demand that. So how does that work?
And then they'd say things like, people
who enjoy their job are more likely to be
(27:08):
engaged. People who feel connected are
more likely to be engaged. And when you
looked at the list, and it was a stacked
list, so it was a nice stacked list of the
questions and concepts we asked, then what
we saw was all of those felt experience.
The feelings just came straight up to the
top. Of course they do. Feelings are
(27:29):
important. Feelings drive us. Feelings
drive us every single day, but they're
things that an organization can't do
anything about. So the concept of PX three
Thinkfield do is actually to say to
organizations, it's important to
understand the feelings. But let's show
you what you can actually do. What can you
actually influence? What can you change?
Put more resources in it, change training,
(27:51):
physically, change the environment? What
can you change that will best predict an
outcome? And we end up then with a model
that says, if you want your people to do
something, they should feel this and they
should think that, which. I think is this
is the big difference between what you
(28:11):
might call a traditional survey, which is
why I want you to come on and explain this
stuff today. Because to me there's a
couple of things I want to just make sure
I understand. Firstly, the clear, obvious
thing for me is there's the emergence of
why outcomes happen, which is really what,
if we think about it, it's really what we
(28:33):
want. Out the back of any, any survey,
whether it's engaged or not, I want. Do
you know what, I want to know why
something's happening. Please not. I just
want to know something is happening. I
want to know why something's happening.
And the three levels just talked about get
to a point of understanding why something
is happening. Right. Which should then
(28:53):
inform where you go and put your focus and
your energy. Yeah, definitely. And I
think, like, if you think about the
concept you just talked about, which is
understanding the why. So if you think
about something like when, when somebody
releases a statement of fact, which is
their fact, which is according to our
data, belonging is super important in an
(29:16):
organization and people who feel they
belong are more likely to be engaged, then
where do we put our efforts and resources?
We put our efforts and resources into
things that we think might impact the
feeling of belonging. So we might do we
start, you know, we do more diversity
training, we might do something around
(29:39):
changing our recruitment approach,
changing our policies, we might do some
stuff around training, development,
whatever that might be, but we might do
some things around gender pay gap, we
might do this stuff and ultimately we're
tackling diversity to drive up belonging.
(30:01):
And that's laudable, by the way. So that
is something every organization should do.
You shouldn't have any practices in your
business that exclude people. Why would
you want to do that? But when we look at
the data and we say actually using a multi
step model, when people feel they belong,
it's because they're recognized, it's
(30:23):
because they have great recognition, they
have appreciation, they are appreciated at
their work, it is because their manager
cares about them. So line manager
capability and attitude is very important
to someone feeling they belong, it's
because they receive the communication
they need to do their job at the time they
need to do their job. So they are kept up
(30:43):
to date. You respect me enough to keep me
up to date on what we're doing. And when
you look at that and you go, that makes
sense. We're complex individuals. I want
to know that I work for an organisation
that values diversity. I want to know, I
work for an organisation that is actively
challenging its things like gender, pay
and owing on a program. I want that, but
(31:05):
when I feel I belong, it's because I'm
treated with respect, I'm recognized when
I do good work, and I feel like the
environmental factors celebrate. So it's a
different path that somebody would go on
to influence something we want for our
people. And when you mentioned before in
(31:26):
the 321123 layers, we talked about
belonging here as one factor. Now, are
those factors standard in every survey, or
are you looking at what an organization is
struggling with, trying to achieve,
wanting to achieve? Are those things
(31:47):
flexing? Are there some core things that
are always there that occasionally bring
some other things in? How's that work? So
flexibility within a framework is probably
the best mantra for PX three. So it's the
framework that allows you to have
confidence, that you can benchmark, that
you can understand how you are against
other people and how you are in your own
organization. The felt experience is very,
(32:11):
is probably the area that we are locking
more than anything, because concepts of
belonging, autonomy, connection, and
growth don't really change much. And
there's not that many questions you need
to ask in that space. So what we do is we
take, what are the outcomes you're looking
for for your people? What does an engaged
(32:31):
employee look like here? What are the
outcomes you want? Where, you know, we're
an innovative organization, I want to
drive innovation. So how do we do that and
what we then look at with our
organization? So we create those outcomes
they're looking for. We then go and look
at their environmental. Do they have any
concerns? Do they have anything that they
think already is worrying them? That we
(32:52):
can start exploring with our surveys and
with our data, we start bringing that
through, and we will then work with our
organization to create the right survey to
do that. Now, surveys have limitations. So
surveys cannot be your only employee
listening tool. No, not at all. You have
to give your people a voice in many
different channels. But surveys allow you
(33:13):
to capture data and then analyze that
data. And PX three, ultimately is a
predictive analytic solution. So we are
looking to best predict what environmental
factor will predict a positive outcome. So
I can give you an example of that if
that's helpful. Yeah. If we look at
(33:35):
something like intention to stay, what we
can pull through from that for an
organization is, and this is the top level
of our data, we can say something like, if
you want your people to do, if you want
your people to stay, they should feel that
they can reach their full potential, they
can develop their career, and they belong,
(33:56):
and they should think that senior leaders
care about people. Good work is
recognized, success is celebrated, and
they're kept up to date. And what we can
effectively turn this then into as a
formula, we've got one client, hospitality
client, who calls it their formula, and
they go out to people and say, this is our
retention formula. Yeah. So these are the
(34:18):
things that environmentally drive
retention. These are the, you know,
there's eight things. These are the four
things that are low scoring. These are the
four things that are high scoring, the
high scoring ones. We are going to
celebrate, we're going to protect, we're
going to get out there and say, well done
to. Everyone's doing it well, the four
things that are not so great for us as an
organization, those are the things that
(34:39):
we're going to take action on. So if you
think about addictive analytics, then
leads to action in the right place for the
right outcome. And what we can then do is
really target that down and say to people,
if you want this, go do this. So none of
(34:59):
that 40 questions, let's tackle the lowest
scoring. It's 40 questions. And these are
the four that you really need to work on
in central London restaurants different in
Manchester. So three of the four are the
same, but there's another one that's
creeped in. So in Manchester, go and do
this and start really flipping that round
a little bit. I think that's the thing
(35:19):
that I like about this whole concept,
because to me it feels different. Because
it feels like future action focused as
opposed to a retrospective view of what's
happening or happened. Yeah, definitely.
And. And because it's broader than
engagement, what we're finding is when we
(35:40):
are sitting in front of boards, so we're
often representing our data and our
insights in front of the boards for our
clients, we're finding that the naturally
cynical people, apologies to every CEO and
CFO out there right now, but the naturally
cynical people for engagement are suddenly
(36:00):
engaged in what we're telling them.
Because when you say to a CFO that the
number one cost challenge you have from a
people perspective is retention, it's
costing you somewhere between three and
10,000 pounds for every lever. More if you
look at some broader data. But let's fix
around that. It's costing you over a
million pounds a year for the headcounts
(36:21):
that you're losing. And we can actually
show you what best predicts intention to
stay and where you're scoring low on that
best prediction. The last time we did this
presentation, CFO sat there and said, this
is a game changer. I know how to help my
HR team. I know how to help my colleague,
(36:41):
my chief people officer when they're
asking for budget and they're asking for
training and development budget, line
management, development budget. This
company has just showed us that line
management capability and training is a
retention driver. There we go. And that's
in most organizations. That is a huge
(37:03):
number, relatively speaking. Right. That
the cost of ineffective retention or
turnover or poor leadership, meaning
you're losing people. Whatever. This is
what I mean about getting under the why
and really focusing on. Actually we've got
this big number that's costing us in lost
productivity or turnover of people, having
(37:24):
to retrain the basics, all that kind of
good stuff. This will absolutely pay back
dividends, right? Yeah. And we don't want
to throw out the baby at the bathwater.
Let's be dead honest with everyone.
Engagement is an amazing concept. It's a
known concept. We are never going to move
away from the terminology of employee
engagement, but moving to what does an
(37:47):
engaged employee look like here really
matters. And being your organization. I
saw a statement about the problem with
external benchmarking, of any
benchmarking, is it's race to mediocrity,
because you are an exceptional
organization that wants to do exceptional
things, and yet you're comparing yourself
(38:07):
to the broadest average out there. So what
you're doing is you're racing to the
middle. Yeah. And if everyone's doing
that, then all we're doing is you might as
well not have 100 amazing, innovative
brands and organizations. You might just
have one Uber organization. And it's not
what organizations need or want. So I
(38:27):
think, yeah, I think we got to go
different. And clearly you are. You've
mentioned the benchmark thing a couple of
times because you provide a benchmark,
right within PX three. My question is
always in these things, people are fixated
with having a benchmark, and I flip flop
myself between, well, it's interesting to
see what other people are doing, but
(38:48):
really we want to focus on what's going on
here. What is your attitude towards
benchmarks? Are they in PX three because
you feel clients want them and need them,
or do you really believe in them? I'm
going to be dead honest. Wear my heart on
my sleeve, Andy, on this, which is the
best benchmark you can possibly have, is
your internal benchmark. As a company,
this is how we have performed. As an
(39:10):
organization, this is how we have
performed. And within our organization,
some people are beating that, some people
are on it and some people are under it. So
let's understand those that are beating
the benchmarking internally, what are they
doing differently? What can we learn? How
can we take what they do into other areas?
The people that are lower in it, what are
(39:30):
they doing differently? What could be the
influence? Internal benchmarking is a
learning, it's a growing benchmark. It is
that whole race to be exceptional.
Everything about your organization drives
you forward. External benchmarking, we
didn't have it in our platform for
probably 80% of our existence. And we put
(39:54):
it in because it was a sales enabler,
because when we were going out and talking
to people, we were going into tenders, we
were going into rfps requests for
procurement, we were going to stuff, and
they said, can you do external
benchmarking? And trying to explain to
somebody that we don't, because you've
(40:15):
lost them. And what we found was some of
the advice I had is you've got to always
be educating, you've always got to be
taking people forward. And we've done some
work recently with a client who had
probably the best case for external
benchmarking. And their view was, if I am
(40:39):
dropping against an external benchmark,
that maybe I was on the external
benchmark, it helps me understand, is it
because we have a systemic issue within
the UK that is affecting everybody? Or is
it something in my organization that is
only my organization or our industry?
Maybe. And the answer to that individual
(41:03):
was, that's actually a really good way of
looking at external benchmarking. But you
are not the norm. That's a very mature way
of looking at it, which is to understand,
but it's not my key driver and I think
that's the problem. It's how are we doing
against everyone else? We're doing okay.
Well then we just don't need to put any
more budget into that. Well then tomorrow
you can have a problem then. That is it,
(41:25):
isn't it? That is the thing. So my view
has changed on benchmark over the years.
But to be clear, external benchmarking
came into our organization to help our
sales and marketing team open doors, not
to help our clients be better. And it's a
(41:47):
hard thing to talk about because if I was
here as a marketing individual, I would be
sitting here going, hey, Andy, having the
right blend of external benchmarking,
internal benchmarking enables you to use
our platform to understand where you are
both within your industry and our client
base, and internally where you can
(42:07):
improve. That's the sales pitch, right?
Yeah, but I would expect nothing other
than honesty and realness from you, which.
Is what we've got, which is 100%. What
we're looking for. Right. We don't want to
hoodwink anybody. I think this is the
thing about trying to understand this
stuff. I think the point about internal
benchmarking is great and it really plays
back to the here inverted commerce piece
(42:28):
that you talked about within the survey.
What's going on within the marketing team,
what's going on within the procurement
team, what's going on within finance?
Here's what matters. How are we performing
and how do we get better? And from what
I've heard today, this is all about
getting under the skin of how do we get
better at delivering the outcomes that we
need as individuals within an organization
and an organization as a whole. If we can
(42:49):
get closer to that stuff, we're going to
be in better places. You know that
expression I'm going to get this wrong.
It's something like the most important
person in the room or the highest paid
person in the room or something like that.
Their view tends to weigh down everyone
else's action. If a CEO says it would be
really interesting to understand how
people with blue eyes felt, then everyone
(43:11):
would leave that meeting going to people
going do we have the data? Do we need to
get the blue eye reports? And the CEO then
wasn't expecting anything but theyve said
it and its happened. And I think most HR
people are absolutely on board with the
whole internal benchmark and is where its
at. The people who have made a throwaway
(43:31):
comment tend to be the CEO, which is what
are we putting on our annual statement as
our engagement score? How do I know if
thats good? And then somebodys turned
around and said well, well, ill create a
benchmark for your CEO and then, then it
becomes industry and it becomes an
industry and it becomes unhelpful. So we
(43:51):
need CEO's to start asking questions like
how are we doing against the outcomes we
want. What a great question. What a great
question. And leads us nicely, I say
nicely most sadly into the bit of a show I
call Sticky notes Nick, where I'm looking
to try and get a bit of a summary on the
things that we've talked about. And by the
way, I've loved it. Absolutely loved it.
(44:13):
We talked earlier about distilling things
down to a single number and how dangerous
that could be in this case. If we're
trying to find out, find out what's going
on and how we can take steps to delivering
some of these outcomes, what three pieces
of advice that you could fit on three
little sticky notes would you leave for
the listeners today, my friend. So I put a
(44:36):
statement on a sticky note that says, we
want to enable outputs. We have to
understand inputs with a little bracket
that says output alone is not the goal.
Nice. Sticking at number two is probably a
memoir, which is simply engagement equals
(44:56):
what an engaged employee looks like here,
not from a trade magazine, not from a
supplier. What does engaged employee look
like here? And my third one is actually a
quote from Rob, which is, it sticks with
me because it's powerful, or I think it's
powerful, which is helping people think
(45:19):
about culture and employee experience.
People experience. So culture is felt by
the group and experience is felt by the
individual. And if people can remember,
the culture we have here as an
organization is widespread and I'm
(45:40):
designing experiences for the individuals.
They then start thinking about the
individual needs, the individual wants,
desires. What are they giving up for their
time at an organization? What are we
giving back to them? So design the
experience, aim for the culture, design
with the individual, aim for the group.
(46:01):
And there I am again, something from
robbins up blowing my mind. What a. What a
marvelous end to the mind blower. He is a
mind blowing, my friend. Nick, it's been
brilliant to have you on. Thanks so much
for. Well, for the honesty and showing
that there's a different way to do this
stuff. I've absolutely loved it. If people
want to find out a bit more about PX three
and the people experience hub, where
(46:23):
should they go. So they can head over to.
We're quite present on LinkedIn, so they
can head over to LinkedIn, search for the
people experience hub and we're there. I'm
Nickor and you can find me on there as
well. Our website is Pxhub IO. So you can
head over to there and you can access all
of our things like ebooks. We've got a.
(46:45):
We've just released our insights report.
So September 24 Insights report has just
dropped that SAR 2024 report that's on the
website. There's loads of resources there
around what we do. And if anyone wants to
reach out, the contact details are all
there on the website as well. We're quite
a community collaborative organization, so
(47:07):
we love to talk to people about what
they're up to that you are. And I will put
all of that stuff in the show notes.
People can find it. Nick, thanks so much
for coming on, my friend. I love what
you're doing and more power to you, my
friend. Amazing. Thank you, Andy. Take
care, my friend. Okay, everyone, that was
Nick Court. And if you'd like to find out
a bit more about him or any of the things
we've talked about today, please check out
the show notes. So that concludes today's
(47:34):
episode. I hope you've enjoyed it, found
it interesting, and heard something maybe
that will help you become a stickier, more
successful business from the inside going
forward. If you have, please like comment
and subscribe. It really helps. I'm Andy
Goram and you've been listening to the
Sticky from the Inside podcast. Until next time, thanks for listening
Hello and welcome to Sticky from the
(00:13):
Inside, the employee engagement podcast
that looks at how to build stickier,
competition,-smashing, consistently
successful organisations from the inside
out. I'm your host, Andy Goram, and I'm
on a mission to help more businesses turn
the lights on behind the eyes of their
employees, light the fires within them,
and create tons more success for everyone.
(00:39):
This podcast is for all those who believe
that's something worth going after and
would like a little help and guidance in
achieving that. Each episode, we dive into
the topics that can help create what I
call stickier businesses. The sort of
businesses where people thrive and love to
work, and where more customers stay with
you and recommend you to others because
(01:01):
they love what you do and why you do it.
So if you want to take the tricky out of
being sticky, listen on. Okay then. Today
I am shaking things up a bit with a
conversation that might just challenge
everything you think you know about
employee engagement. If you've ever been
(01:22):
involved in an employee engagement survey,
you know the drill. Numbers go up,
celebrations ensue, numbers dip, and it's
time to scramble for a fix. They're now
bored of bean bags. We clearly need more
fruit and a new coffee machine. But here's
the thing. What if chasing that elusive
engagement score is actually taking us in
(01:42):
entirely the wrong direction? My guest
today is Nick Court, the founder and CEO
of the People Experience Hub, and he's
here to tell us why 2024 needs to be the
year we go beyond the score. Nick believes
that we've been so focused on those
numbers that we've lost sight of what
really matters, understanding their
(02:04):
behaviors, experiences, and feelings that
truly shape workplace culture. So let's
get real. Are we simply ticking boxes and
patting ourselves on the back for a high
score? Or are we digging deeper to
understand what's really driving, saving
or stalling our people's engagement? And
is even that the thing that we should be
(02:25):
measuring? What, have we been doing it
wrong all along? In today's episode, I
hope we'll explore these questions and
more. We'll unpack why the traditional
approach to employee engagement might not
be moving the dial like we think it is.
After all, globally, engagement numbers
haven't budged significantly in decades.
Despite all the surveys, despite all the
(02:45):
money that's spent on it's been, all the
efforts. There's something somewhere isn't
right. So what does it take to design to
grow and maintain a workforce that's not
just engaged but really thriving? How do
we know what the key elements are to
achieving that outcome and how we should
we measure our progress in working our way
(03:07):
towards that. So buckle up as I think
Nick's about to flip the script on
everything we thought we knew about
engagement. Welcome to the show, Nick.
Randy, welcome for having me on here. It's
exciting. I'm excited and it is exciting.
So, yeah, looking forward to jumping into
this. Me too, mate. Me too. Now, before we
start, just so everybody gets on the same
page, just do us a favor, my friend. Just
(03:29):
give us a little bit of insight into you
and your background and perhaps the
origins of the people experience hub. I
came into the world of HR for a slightly
different route to others, which is I came
in from an operational background and I,
more than that, I came in from actually
from a trade union background. So I
started my life working in a warehouse and
(03:51):
I was a trade union rep for years and then
I was a trade union. Fisher was a branch
chair. So I got into the concept of how we
should be treating people at work through,
number one, experiencing it, and number
two, supporting trade union members and
Tesco employees. So I very much came into
it that way. And I had the opportunity to
(04:12):
go into payroll team. The HR director at
the time said to me, you know more about
our policies and procedures than so many
other people do in the organization. And
payroll is simply taking those policies
and procedures and turning them into
transactional elements like pay. So I did
that, found out I had an affinity for
payroll, affinity for HR systems, and from
(04:36):
there I progressed. I then left and went
for Associated british foods. So I got
from retail into food manufacturing, where
I looked after HR, shared services, reward
benefits, global mobility, went from there
to Carlsberg. Then I realized I've gone
from a 400,000 person company to a large
(04:59):
company to a 1800 person company. And I
decided to set out on my own, went out and
did a consultancy role, and then that's
where the people experience hub concept
came along. I sat with my business
partner, Ben at the time. We were looking
at, you know, what we felt was wrong in
the world and or wasn't quite working,
probably more than anything. And we said,
(05:20):
one of the things around colleague surveys
as people surveys is it feels a little bit
like tail wagging the dog. Like the
supplier of the survey is telling you how
to do it, telling you what the measure is
telling you the question to ask and not
really understand the experience. And my,
and that's where we went out to solve and
(05:42):
that's where the people experience hub was
born. Fantastic. And it's clearly doing
great stuff. You've just received a
finalist kind of nomination for the people
pioneers for 2024. Congratulations on
that. That's great. Culture pioneers. The
Culture Pioneers award is for brand. So
it's about, does our external brand and
(06:02):
our internal brand match up when we walk
the walk and talk the talk, do the two
things come together? So delighted to have
been a finalist for that. Oh, I think
that, say, do gap is so important when it
comes down to people and culture and
really, really delivering this kind of
thriving environment. We're hopefully
going to talk about today. Now, back early
(06:24):
in the day, I had your friend and
colleague Rob Robson come on and totally
blow my mind while asking him this very
simple question, which I'll ask to you,
which was a. From your perspective, Nick,
when we talk about employee engagement,
what are we referring to? So it's Rob.
(06:45):
And, you know, I'm going to be careful
here because I don't want to be. I don't
be competing against, you know, what. What
Rob does. Rob, you know, Rob is. Rob's far
more intelligent than I am. Okay? I'm a. I
feel my intelligence comes through my
feet. You know, it comes, like, where I
am, where I'm walking and all that stuff
and my life experience. So when I think
about employee engagement, I really. I
(07:08):
understand if I'm engaged in something,
right? I understand that. When I go into a
shop, am I more engaged in Coke or Pepsi?
Right? I know what I'm engaged in. I know
how I feel that day. And I think that we
can risk over complicating what is
effectively. What is engagement? The
(07:29):
answer is, well, what does an engaged
employee look like in your organization?
What does an engaged employee look like to
you? What does someone who is engaged,
what does their behavior look like? What
do you expect somebody who's engaged to
do? You expect them to be responding and
responsive. You expect them to advocate
and be advocating. You expect them to
(07:53):
align with what you're doing. And we got
to think that engagement ultimately is a
set of things, but ultimately, it's about
motivation. When I walk past three
restaurants on the high street, which is
the one I'm most engaged with, which is
the one that gives me a great experience,
and experience leads to engagement. So I'm
(08:14):
deliberately, by the way, keeping this
vague, because the problem of locking
engagement down to one thing and then
going at it means that we are going at a
social norm, and we are ignoring any
differences that there may be in the
world. And we are. When we go at a social
(08:36):
norm, think about what social normative
groups are. We end up at a risk of what is
employee engagement for white middle aged
men? And what we have to look at is an
engaged employee is likely to do the
following things. It's likely to behave
like this, and it's the behaviors we're
(08:56):
looking for. So I've deliberately not
answered your question. You have answered
my question. You've just done it
differently to Rob. Rob, you know, just
absolutely did my brain in, in a good way.
Yeah. And what you've done is you've
taught my language, Nick, which is
amazing. I'm not comfortable with. And
maybe this is the problem. I mean,
measurement is going to be at the heart of
(09:17):
what we end up talking about today,
because we can talk about alignment and we
can talk about behavior and we can talk
about differences. Somewhere in there,
organizations are trying to measure
something, and we, the fewer things we
measure, I guess the more comfortable we
feel. Oh, it's that thing. Right. But if
that is the case, what are we doing wrong
(09:38):
at the moment? Because I mentioned, and
depending which survey you look at,
numbers go up, numbers go down. I think
it's reasonably well understood that
globally, that number's been pretty
static, pretty stagnant right around
engagement. Organizations are different,
countries might be different. Globally,
it's not really changed much. So what's
(09:59):
wrong? What's happening with this
measurement thing? What are we doing
wrong? Nick? I think there's no harm in
having a concept of engagement and having
a concept of a number to help us
understand if we are heading in the right
direction. And I think ultimately that's
what's been lost. And if we were to go to
(10:19):
an organization, let's go. We'll go to
hello fresh Hellofresh. That has a huge
technology arm, a huge commercial business
arm, and then a huge production arm. And
you were to talk to them about what does
employee engagement look like? It must
look different in different parts of their
business. To then have an overarching
(10:43):
measure that tries to span all of that is
almost impossible just in one
organization. So what we see going wrong
is that theres a couple of things, I
think. So number one is chasing the
benchmark. So the benchmark becomes the
score, the score becomes the goal, and the
obsession on the goal becomes the driver
(11:04):
of behaviors. And if all you have to do is
increase your engagement score from 72% to
73%, then what will you do? And will you
do it in a sustainable way? And will you
do it in a way that is understood by
everybody? And will you declare that when
you get to 74%, because the benchmark
(11:26):
provided by the wisdom in the world, which
is the data that people have decided to
share, will you then stop? And ultimately,
you can't sit there and say, we're going
to design an experience that people are
going to interact with for 8 hours a day,
10 hours a day, 12 hours a day, and do it
(11:47):
in the same way that a retailer may design
an experience for somebody who's going to
come in once a week, it's different. So
that whole customer experience and
employee experience, we can learn so much,
we can learn a bit. But designing
something that's going to take a third of
people's lives and be so influential is
something you can't stop when you hit the
goal. And I think that's one of the big
(12:10):
problems, is employee engagement. Creates
an employee engagement benchmark, which
locks people into a concept of engagement,
which locks people into six questions that
are the engagement questions. And then we
chase the benchmark. And what we do is we
limit ourselves on things that are not
engagement. So what does an organization
want? Employee engagement. Of course it
(12:32):
wants employee engagement. That's a nice
measure of are people motivated? Are they
engaged? They want their people to be
well, right? So well being must be a
measure of an outcome. They want people to
be innovative, they want people to be
ready for change. They want people to be
motivated and motivational. They want
(12:53):
people to be productive. So there's so
many things that they want for their
people and of their people, that
engagement can only ever be a small subset
of that. So there's a real risk that says,
when engagement is the only score you're
chasing or the only goal in town, you're
racing to the benchmark and you're
comparing yourself, hello, fresh is
(13:14):
comparing themselves to Sainsbury's and
comparing themselves to Barclays and
comparing themselves to different
industries, across different groups with
different experiences. When, if you just
ask the question, what do we want of our
people? What do we need to give them? What
does an engaged person look here, look
like here? And what are our expectations
(13:39):
of outcomes like innovation, change,
readiness, and well being, you start
asking far broader questions. And, you
know, if my original answer to what is
engagement is vague, that's because
engagement is vague. It's nebulous as a
concept. And therefore, trying to chase it
(14:00):
sometimes can feel like you're batting
away at clouds and mist, especially if
you're chasing. The wrong things,
especially if we're going down the wrong
paths, if the information or the data
we're getting, I guess, isn't nuanced
enough, isn't asking the right sort of
questions, to get the outcomes that we're
looking for and that people need. And I
think also this point and the dangers,
(14:21):
perhaps discuss a bit more about the
dangers of being obsessed with a score is
that this isn't like a PlayStation game. I
don't, I don't think that I've got to 75.
Therefore I've completed engagement.
Right. What's the next game? Because this
is an ongoing quest, right? Involving in
(14:42):
culture. It's a never ending thing. You've
constantly got to work on it, to keep it,
to maintain it, to grow it. People come in
and people go, things change, dynamics
change. Right? It's, it's a, it's a living
beast. So even the context of engagement
must change over time with business focus
changing and industry changing. Yeah, it
(15:02):
has to. When you look at the most
innovative organizations or innovative
brands, what do they do? They buck the
trends. They go different, they do more,
and they obviously need to understand what
they want to be. But if your focus is only
on engagement, then your focus can't also
be on being a better business, on helping
(15:25):
our people create a better business for us
and our customers and our stakeholders.
And I think there's a broader set that
needs to be looked at here. And ultimately
we can also get into the concept that is
to HR. Have a seat at the table. So where
does employee engagement sit within an
organization? Typically, the transactional
(15:47):
running of surveys and starting to pull
strategy sits within the HR of the people
teams. My experience when we have stood up
in front of boards and we talk about
engagement because it is such a nebulous
concept, because no one can say, when you
do this, you get that it's about, well, we
must increase our engagement score. And
(16:09):
it's like, well, what's important to you?
And when you say to a CEO or a CFO, we can
improve retention, we can increase
productivity, we can improve motivation,
we can increase advocacy. Your promoters
and your internal organization, it's more
solid. But our obsession with wrapping all
(16:29):
of that up into one concept of engagement
has become quite high. And I think if
organizations were focused on designing
the experience for our people to deliver
for our customers and consumers, you end
up with the 1950s thinking of the service
profit chain. There's a bit of me still
(16:52):
rose tinted glasses that just loves the
concept of the service profit chain.
Right? I think it lives and breathes and
we can overcomplicate things or try and
change them. That's still at the heart of
it all. Happy employees, happy customers,
happy shareholders. Off we go. All good. I
wonder whether some of this, some of this
(17:13):
measurement issue is a quest for
simplicity driven by communication above
all else rather than actual outcome. So we
need to be able to tell people what, how
engaged people are in this business.
Therefore we need something really
simplistic and the easier we can make it
to understand as in a number well then
(17:36):
more people will comprehend what is the
reality is something that doesn't do
anything that probably has just more
questions. Maybe even something like net
promoter score is like the devil, right?
We've got this one number. It tells us
everything. What on earth does it tell us?
I mean it's a great example because the
guy who invented NP's, the net promoter
(17:58):
score, regrets doing it. He's publicly
came out and said he regrets creating the
one score you need to manage your
business, which is net promoter. Would I
recommend this company to my friends and
family? And that means from a consumer
perspective it wasn't long before people
co opted that into the enPs, the employee
(18:19):
net promoter score. And so it's like, okay
so you are Nike with millions of consumers
and millions of data points and you want
to get one question but you employ 1000
people but you now want to try and take
that same concept to a thousand people.
Would I recommend this as a great place to
work? And are you a detractor or a
promoter? When you look at McKinsey you
(18:41):
look at someone else talking about NP's.
The one danger of NP's is it asks what
would you do? Not what did you do? What do
you do? What would you do? It's a
measurement of your perceived intent to do
something, not your opportunity to do it.
So it doesn't ask you do you have the
(19:02):
opportunity to recommend someone to this
brand or this organization? It says would
you if you had the opportunity, not did
you and have you in the last however long
and then takes you away from the rest of
your business. So when you see businesses
that have struggled who have these
measurements they don't understand but we
(19:23):
have a good NP's or a good enps and it's
like. But that's not the only thing. Yeah,
you can't measure every part of your
people, you know, and your people KPI's
based on whether they would recommend you
as a great place to work. There's a number
of pitfalls there I think with the
measures. Look, I've, I've used emps. You
(19:44):
know, I'm not, I'm not here trying to sort
of like say I haven't. I have, but I guess
I've seen the light on those sort of
things. But also like as a, if I'm doing
facilitation work, right, let's say I'm
doing, I'm running a leadership
development course. There's a survey at
the end of that program for all the
delegates to take and, you know, was it
engaging and fun and all those sort of
good questions are coming through. I know
(20:06):
if I've had a really challenging group and
I've had to challenge them to get them to
think, to move forward, I know more often
than not in the moment my scores may be
lower than I would like because it's been
an uncomfortable session. However, I also
know that six months down the line I get
emails from people saying, you know, that
(20:27):
time I didn't like you very much for
pushing me. Actually, I'm now kind of
seeing why. You and I've recommended you
to ten people who revived that. It would
be great. And I think this is the
important thing when we talk about
something like NP's is the difference
between the question you're asking and the
measurement you apply. And this is which
wells back into this, which is I don't
(20:48):
have any problem at all with asking
somebody, would you recommend us to your
friends and family as a great place to
work? If we had a vacancy, would you refer
your friend to come and work here? Its a
great indicator of engagement. Its a great
measure of that. But I have a real issue
is probably this eleven point scale that
says, are you a detractor or a promoter?
(21:10):
Is it plus 50 -100 because it gives no one
anything to go on. You know, the third
thing is it cannot be your only score. My
experience of the training that I had with
you, the environment was one that was
conducive to learning to change. The
materials I had that I had to work with
(21:31):
enabled me to take part. The preemptive
work enabled me to understand what's
happening. Was it uncomfortable? Maybe.
Would I recommend you ask me again in six
months? Yeah, you know, all of that stuff
is good, but you got to look at it in the
round to understand the full experience.
Absolutely. And so that's, that's what I
(21:51):
want to kind of drill into. So we've
talked about outcomes and trying to
understand the various outcomes or even
the specific outcomes that we're looking
for to sort of see, well, is the business
in the people inside the business
thriving? Have they got an opportunity to
do their best thing, bring them, bring
their best self, share their efforts, you
(22:12):
know, contribute in some sort of way? So
in the quest for simplicity, maybe we've
gone down the wrong path. Right. Maybe
we're starting to look at okay measures,
not the most useful measures, because we
haven't really thought about the outcomes
that we're looking for. And so maybe.
Maybe we're doing. Employing agent wrong.
(22:32):
You know, maybe we've led down a garden
path, and if we. We follow the wrong
scores and the wrong measures, we're going
to do the wrong things. And so, in the
work that you're doing, which, from what I
have seen out there, is different. And
even back in the day, when I talked to
rob, this stuff was being thought about
(22:54):
and trialed and tested, but now it's out
there. I want you to tell us about the.
The PX three model, the sort of think,
feel, do model. What is it? What is it
attempting to do, and how does it work? PX
(23:15):
three looks effectively at broader
concepts than engagement. So it looks at
outcomes, people outcomes. So, if you
think about the three levels we're looking
at, I'm going to go 3213 is people
outcomes. And, of course, you can have a
rolled up engagement measure in that. But
ultimately, we're looking at things like
(23:37):
outcomes like retention, intention to
stay, motivation, well being. Can people
be well in your organization? And
innovation, readiness for change. So, all
of these things are outcomes. And when we
think about outcomes, you got to think
about the things that are desirable for
(23:59):
your people as an organization, because,
you know, when these outcomes happen, you
do well as an organization, so you're
winning. And the outcomes you want for
your people because you care about them,
you want your people to be well, not just
because when they're well, they'll do more
productive work, because, you know, that
that's ultimately might be someone feels
like that organization, but, you know, a
(24:21):
caring organization wants their people to
be well. They want their people to be
motivated. They want their people to be
ready for any change that's coming. Yeah.
So there's a balance there between
organizational needs and organizational
wants for their people. So there's a
balance there. Number three. Number two is
the felt experience that comes under feel.
So where number three is outcomes, which
(24:43):
is what are people likely to do? Do.
Number two is the felt experience. And
this is how do people feel? And here,
where we. What we put in here are things
like the feelings of autonomy, belonging,
the feelings of connection and enjoyment.
(25:03):
So if you think about these as meeting the
fundamental human needs that we have. And
number one is the perceived environment.
So this is the think part of think, Phil,
do. And the perceived environment is how
people perceive the environment around
them. I think. I believe that my manager
(25:24):
cares for me. I think that the
communications are adequate. I think that
I receive recognition. I think as an
organization, we're doing everything we
can to be sustainable. And what this
allows us to do is it allows us to take a
concept then, which is we can draw a line
between those. Because the only thing you
(25:45):
can do as an organization is tackle the
area of think. So when you look at that
and you go, how do people think is the
only area that I can influence? You can't
tell people how to feel, and you can't
demand an outcome for long. Maybe you can
demand an outcome in a real controlled
(26:05):
environment. Not sustainably, no. So the
two things you can't control, we measure
and we understand, and then we measure the
thing you can control, because that's the
lever you can pull. So when we say, think,
feel, do, we're now able to do that. And
why did we go down this route? Rather than
a classic way of measuring engagement or
(26:26):
looking at standard approaches, which are
all fine as well in their own space, it
was because it gave us richer. So we see
this as the next evolution. We see this as
the model, the framework of engagement
plus one, you know, and if you look at
what other people are doing, what we saw
(26:48):
was you'd end up with this huge list that
said, people who feel they belong are
twelve times more likely to be engaged.
Okay? I don't, I can't tell them how to, I
can't demand they feel that they belong. I
can't demand that. So how does that work?
And then they'd say things like, people
who enjoy their job are more likely to be
(27:08):
engaged. People who feel connected are
more likely to be engaged. And when you
looked at the list, and it was a stacked
list, so it was a nice stacked list of the
questions and concepts we asked, then what
we saw was all of those felt experience.
The feelings just came straight up to the
top. Of course they do. Feelings are
(27:29):
important. Feelings drive us. Feelings
drive us every single day, but they're
things that an organization can't do
anything about. So the concept of PX three
Thinkfield do is actually to say to
organizations, it's important to
understand the feelings. But let's show
you what you can actually do. What can you
actually influence? What can you change?
Put more resources in it, change training,
(27:51):
physically, change the environment? What
can you change that will best predict an
outcome? And we end up then with a model
that says, if you want your people to do
something, they should feel this and they
should think that, which. I think is this
is the big difference between what you
(28:11):
might call a traditional survey, which is
why I want you to come on and explain this
stuff today. Because to me there's a
couple of things I want to just make sure
I understand. Firstly, the clear, obvious
thing for me is there's the emergence of
why outcomes happen, which is really what,
if we think about it, it's really what we
(28:33):
want. Out the back of any, any survey,
whether it's engaged or not, I want. Do
you know what, I want to know why
something's happening. Please not. I just
want to know something is happening. I
want to know why something's happening.
And the three levels just talked about get
to a point of understanding why something
is happening. Right. Which should then
(28:53):
inform where you go and put your focus and
your energy. Yeah, definitely. And I
think, like, if you think about the
concept you just talked about, which is
understanding the why. So if you think
about something like when, when somebody
releases a statement of fact, which is
their fact, which is according to our
data, belonging is super important in an
(29:16):
organization and people who feel they
belong are more likely to be engaged, then
where do we put our efforts and resources?
We put our efforts and resources into
things that we think might impact the
feeling of belonging. So we might do we
start, you know, we do more diversity
training, we might do something around
(29:39):
changing our recruitment approach,
changing our policies, we might do some
stuff around training, development,
whatever that might be, but we might do
some things around gender pay gap, we
might do this stuff and ultimately we're
tackling diversity to drive up belonging.
(30:01):
And that's laudable, by the way. So that
is something every organization should do.
You shouldn't have any practices in your
business that exclude people. Why would
you want to do that? But when we look at
the data and we say actually using a multi
step model, when people feel they belong,
it's because they're recognized, it's
(30:23):
because they have great recognition, they
have appreciation, they are appreciated at
their work, it is because their manager
cares about them. So line manager
capability and attitude is very important
to someone feeling they belong, it's
because they receive the communication
they need to do their job at the time they
need to do their job. So they are kept up
(30:43):
to date. You respect me enough to keep me
up to date on what we're doing. And when
you look at that and you go, that makes
sense. We're complex individuals. I want
to know that I work for an organisation
that values diversity. I want to know, I
work for an organisation that is actively
challenging its things like gender, pay
and owing on a program. I want that, but
(31:05):
when I feel I belong, it's because I'm
treated with respect, I'm recognized when
I do good work, and I feel like the
environmental factors celebrate. So it's a
different path that somebody would go on
to influence something we want for our
people. And when you mentioned before in
(31:26):
the 321123 layers, we talked about
belonging here as one factor. Now, are
those factors standard in every survey, or
are you looking at what an organization is
struggling with, trying to achieve,
wanting to achieve? Are those things
(31:47):
flexing? Are there some core things that
are always there that occasionally bring
some other things in? How's that work? So
flexibility within a framework is probably
the best mantra for PX three. So it's the
framework that allows you to have
confidence, that you can benchmark, that
you can understand how you are against
other people and how you are in your own
organization. The felt experience is very,
(32:11):
is probably the area that we are locking
more than anything, because concepts of
belonging, autonomy, connection, and
growth don't really change much. And
there's not that many questions you need
to ask in that space. So what we do is we
take, what are the outcomes you're looking
for for your people? What does an engaged
(32:31):
employee look like here? What are the
outcomes you want? Where, you know, we're
an innovative organization, I want to
drive innovation. So how do we do that and
what we then look at with our
organization? So we create those outcomes
they're looking for. We then go and look
at their environmental. Do they have any
concerns? Do they have anything that they
think already is worrying them? That we
(32:52):
can start exploring with our surveys and
with our data, we start bringing that
through, and we will then work with our
organization to create the right survey to
do that. Now, surveys have limitations. So
surveys cannot be your only employee
listening tool. No, not at all. You have
to give your people a voice in many
different channels. But surveys allow you
(33:13):
to capture data and then analyze that
data. And PX three, ultimately is a
predictive analytic solution. So we are
looking to best predict what environmental
factor will predict a positive outcome. So
I can give you an example of that if
that's helpful. Yeah. If we look at
(33:35):
something like intention to stay, what we
can pull through from that for an
organization is, and this is the top level
of our data, we can say something like, if
you want your people to do, if you want
your people to stay, they should feel that
they can reach their full potential, they
can develop their career, and they belong,
(33:56):
and they should think that senior leaders
care about people. Good work is
recognized, success is celebrated, and
they're kept up to date. And what we can
effectively turn this then into as a
formula, we've got one client, hospitality
client, who calls it their formula, and
they go out to people and say, this is our
retention formula. Yeah. So these are the
(34:18):
things that environmentally drive
retention. These are the, you know,
there's eight things. These are the four
things that are low scoring. These are the
four things that are high scoring, the
high scoring ones. We are going to
celebrate, we're going to protect, we're
going to get out there and say, well done
to. Everyone's doing it well, the four
things that are not so great for us as an
organization, those are the things that
(34:39):
we're going to take action on. So if you
think about addictive analytics, then
leads to action in the right place for the
right outcome. And what we can then do is
really target that down and say to people,
if you want this, go do this. So none of
(34:59):
that 40 questions, let's tackle the lowest
scoring. It's 40 questions. And these are
the four that you really need to work on
in central London restaurants different in
Manchester. So three of the four are the
same, but there's another one that's
creeped in. So in Manchester, go and do
this and start really flipping that round
a little bit. I think that's the thing
(35:19):
that I like about this whole concept,
because to me it feels different. Because
it feels like future action focused as
opposed to a retrospective view of what's
happening or happened. Yeah, definitely.
And. And because it's broader than
engagement, what we're finding is when we
(35:40):
are sitting in front of boards, so we're
often representing our data and our
insights in front of the boards for our
clients, we're finding that the naturally
cynical people, apologies to every CEO and
CFO out there right now, but the naturally
cynical people for engagement are suddenly
(36:00):
engaged in what we're telling them.
Because when you say to a CFO that the
number one cost challenge you have from a
people perspective is retention, it's
costing you somewhere between three and
10,000 pounds for every lever. More if you
look at some broader data. But let's fix
around that. It's costing you over a
million pounds a year for the headcounts
(36:21):
that you're losing. And we can actually
show you what best predicts intention to
stay and where you're scoring low on that
best prediction. The last time we did this
presentation, CFO sat there and said, this
is a game changer. I know how to help my
HR team. I know how to help my colleague,
(36:41):
my chief people officer when they're
asking for budget and they're asking for
training and development budget, line
management, development budget. This
company has just showed us that line
management capability and training is a
retention driver. There we go. And that's
in most organizations. That is a huge
(37:03):
number, relatively speaking. Right. That
the cost of ineffective retention or
turnover or poor leadership, meaning
you're losing people. Whatever. This is
what I mean about getting under the why
and really focusing on. Actually we've got
this big number that's costing us in lost
productivity or turnover of people, having
(37:24):
to retrain the basics, all that kind of
good stuff. This will absolutely pay back
dividends, right? Yeah. And we don't want
to throw out the baby at the bathwater.
Let's be dead honest with everyone.
Engagement is an amazing concept. It's a
known concept. We are never going to move
away from the terminology of employee
engagement, but moving to what does an
(37:47):
engaged employee look like here really
matters. And being your organization. I
saw a statement about the problem with
external benchmarking, of any
benchmarking, is it's race to mediocrity,
because you are an exceptional
organization that wants to do exceptional
things, and yet you're comparing yourself
(38:07):
to the broadest average out there. So what
you're doing is you're racing to the
middle. Yeah. And if everyone's doing
that, then all we're doing is you might as
well not have 100 amazing, innovative
brands and organizations. You might just
have one Uber organization. And it's not
what organizations need or want. So I
(38:27):
think, yeah, I think we got to go
different. And clearly you are. You've
mentioned the benchmark thing a couple of
times because you provide a benchmark,
right within PX three. My question is
always in these things, people are fixated
with having a benchmark, and I flip flop
myself between, well, it's interesting to
see what other people are doing, but
(38:48):
really we want to focus on what's going on
here. What is your attitude towards
benchmarks? Are they in PX three because
you feel clients want them and need them,
or do you really believe in them? I'm
going to be dead honest. Wear my heart on
my sleeve, Andy, on this, which is the
best benchmark you can possibly have, is
your internal benchmark. As a company,
this is how we have performed. As an
(39:10):
organization, this is how we have
performed. And within our organization,
some people are beating that, some people
are on it and some people are under it. So
let's understand those that are beating
the benchmarking internally, what are they
doing differently? What can we learn? How
can we take what they do into other areas?
The people that are lower in it, what are
(39:30):
they doing differently? What could be the
influence? Internal benchmarking is a
learning, it's a growing benchmark. It is
that whole race to be exceptional.
Everything about your organization drives
you forward. External benchmarking, we
didn't have it in our platform for
probably 80% of our existence. And we put
(39:54):
it in because it was a sales enabler,
because when we were going out and talking
to people, we were going into tenders, we
were going into rfps requests for
procurement, we were going to stuff, and
they said, can you do external
benchmarking? And trying to explain to
somebody that we don't, because you've
(40:15):
lost them. And what we found was some of
the advice I had is you've got to always
be educating, you've always got to be
taking people forward. And we've done some
work recently with a client who had
probably the best case for external
benchmarking. And their view was, if I am
(40:39):
dropping against an external benchmark,
that maybe I was on the external
benchmark, it helps me understand, is it
because we have a systemic issue within
the UK that is affecting everybody? Or is
it something in my organization that is
only my organization or our industry?
Maybe. And the answer to that individual
(41:03):
was, that's actually a really good way of
looking at external benchmarking. But you
are not the norm. That's a very mature way
of looking at it, which is to understand,
but it's not my key driver and I think
that's the problem. It's how are we doing
against everyone else? We're doing okay.
Well then we just don't need to put any
more budget into that. Well then tomorrow
you can have a problem then. That is it,
(41:25):
isn't it? That is the thing. So my view
has changed on benchmark over the years.
But to be clear, external benchmarking
came into our organization to help our
sales and marketing team open doors, not
to help our clients be better. And it's a
(41:47):
hard thing to talk about because if I was
here as a marketing individual, I would be
sitting here going, hey, Andy, having the
right blend of external benchmarking,
internal benchmarking enables you to use
our platform to understand where you are
both within your industry and our client
base, and internally where you can
(42:07):
improve. That's the sales pitch, right?
Yeah, but I would expect nothing other
than honesty and realness from you, which.
Is what we've got, which is 100%. What
we're looking for. Right. We don't want to
hoodwink anybody. I think this is the
thing about trying to understand this
stuff. I think the point about internal
benchmarking is great and it really plays
back to the here inverted commerce piece
(42:28):
that you talked about within the survey.
What's going on within the marketing team,
what's going on within the procurement
team, what's going on within finance?
Here's what matters. How are we performing
and how do we get better? And from what
I've heard today, this is all about
getting under the skin of how do we get
better at delivering the outcomes that we
need as individuals within an organization
and an organization as a whole. If we can
(42:49):
get closer to that stuff, we're going to
be in better places. You know that
expression I'm going to get this wrong.
It's something like the most important
person in the room or the highest paid
person in the room or something like that.
Their view tends to weigh down everyone
else's action. If a CEO says it would be
really interesting to understand how
people with blue eyes felt, then everyone
(43:11):
would leave that meeting going to people
going do we have the data? Do we need to
get the blue eye reports? And the CEO then
wasn't expecting anything but theyve said
it and its happened. And I think most HR
people are absolutely on board with the
whole internal benchmark and is where its
at. The people who have made a throwaway
(43:31):
comment tend to be the CEO, which is what
are we putting on our annual statement as
our engagement score? How do I know if
thats good? And then somebodys turned
around and said well, well, ill create a
benchmark for your CEO and then, then it
becomes industry and it becomes an
industry and it becomes unhelpful. So we
(43:51):
need CEO's to start asking questions like
how are we doing against the outcomes we
want. What a great question. What a great
question. And leads us nicely, I say
nicely most sadly into the bit of a show I
call Sticky notes Nick, where I'm looking
to try and get a bit of a summary on the
things that we've talked about. And by the
way, I've loved it. Absolutely loved it.
(44:13):
We talked earlier about distilling things
down to a single number and how dangerous
that could be in this case. If we're
trying to find out, find out what's going
on and how we can take steps to delivering
some of these outcomes, what three pieces
of advice that you could fit on three
little sticky notes would you leave for
the listeners today, my friend. So I put a
(44:36):
statement on a sticky note that says, we
want to enable outputs. We have to
understand inputs with a little bracket
that says output alone is not the goal.
Nice. Sticking at number two is probably a
memoir, which is simply engagement equals
(44:56):
what an engaged employee looks like here,
not from a trade magazine, not from a
supplier. What does engaged employee look
like here? And my third one is actually a
quote from Rob, which is, it sticks with
me because it's powerful, or I think it's
powerful, which is helping people think
(45:19):
about culture and employee experience.
People experience. So culture is felt by
the group and experience is felt by the
individual. And if people can remember,
the culture we have here as an
organization is widespread and I'm
(45:40):
designing experiences for the individuals.
They then start thinking about the
individual needs, the individual wants,
desires. What are they giving up for their
time at an organization? What are we
giving back to them? So design the
experience, aim for the culture, design
with the individual, aim for the group.
(46:01):
And there I am again, something from
robbins up blowing my mind. What a. What a
marvelous end to the mind blower. He is a
mind blowing, my friend. Nick, it's been
brilliant to have you on. Thanks so much
for. Well, for the honesty and showing
that there's a different way to do this
stuff. I've absolutely loved it. If people
want to find out a bit more about PX three
and the people experience hub, where
(46:23):
should they go. So they can head over to.
We're quite present on LinkedIn, so they
can head over to LinkedIn, search for the
people experience hub and we're there. I'm
Nickor and you can find me on there as
well. Our website is Pxhub IO. So you can
head over to there and you can access all
of our things like ebooks. We've got a.
(46:45):
We've just released our insights report.
So September 24 Insights report has just
dropped that SAR 2024 report that's on the
website. There's loads of resources there
around what we do. And if anyone wants to
reach out, the contact details are all
there on the website as well. We're quite
a community collaborative organization, so
(47:07):
we love to talk to people about what
they're up to that you are. And I will put
all of that stuff in the show notes.
People can find it. Nick, thanks so much
for coming on, my friend. I love what
you're doing and more power to you, my
friend. Amazing. Thank you, Andy. Take
care, my friend. Okay, everyone, that was
Nick Court. And if you'd like to find out
a bit more about him or any of the things
we've talked about today, please check out
the show notes. So that concludes today's
(47:34):
episode. I hope you've enjoyed it, found
it interesting, and heard something maybe
that will help you become a stickier, more
successful business from the inside going
forward. If you have, please like comment
and subscribe. It really helps. I'm Andy
Goram and you've been listening to the
Sticky from the Inside podcast. Until next time, thanks for listening
Popular Podcasts
United States of Kennedy
United States of Kennedy is a podcast about our cultural fascination with the Kennedy dynasty. Every week, hosts Lyra Smith and George Civeris go into one aspect of the Kennedy story.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.