INSTITUTE OF BUSINESS MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH

International Business School

A PRO1ECT REPORT ON
~Employee Engagement strategies adopted by the companies
With special reIerence to the Human Resource Department

$:-2itted in partial I:lIill2ent oI the award oI the degree aster of Business
Administration (BA) oIIered - Bharathiar Universit d:ring the ear
2009 2011.

Submitted By
Nancy Agrawal
Reg No: 09P35G0131

Under the guidance of;
ternal Internal
office ) Aandeesh J.Hiremath
IBMR - IBS

Centre Ior Participator and Online Progra2s
Bharathiar Universit
Coi2-atore 641 046
Date: 4 Octo-er, 2010


Institute of Business Management and Research
International Business School

Guide Certificate


%his is to certiI that this report titled ~Stragies adopted by the companies for
Employee Engagement with special reIerence to the Human Resource
Department, s:-2itted in partial I:lIill2ent oI the Master oI B:siness
Ad2inistration co:rse is -ased on an original and independent work carried o:t -
Nanc Agrawal :nder 2 g:idance and s:pervision.

%his has not Ior2ed the -asis Ior the award oI an other degree or diplo2a oI an
other Universit or Instit:tion.



Signature Signature

IBMR IB$ IBMR IB$
Bangalore Bangalore



Declaration


I here- declare that this project titled ~Strategies adopted by the companies for
Employee Engagement is prepared - 2e d:ring the acade2ic ear 2009 - 2011
:nder the g:idance oI !rof. Dr. Nandeesh J.Hiremath oI IBMR IB$ and (ur
office Head name.)

I also declare that this project prepared - 2e has -een done Ior partial I:lIill2ent
oI the req:ire2ent Ior the degree oI Master oI B:siness Ad2inistration` oIIered
- Bharathiar Universit. %his project is not -ased on an previo:sl s:-2itted
project Ior the award oI an degree or diplo2a oIIered - an Universit. It is a
res:lt oI 2 own eIIorts and hard work.







Date: 25 April, 2011 Nancy Agrawal
Place: Bangalore Reg No: 09P35G0131




ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I wo:ld like to express 2 sincere gratit:de to all those who have -een
instr:2ental in the presentation oI this project.

I wo:ld like to thank the Dean oI IBMR - IB$ Bangalore, Dr. C. Manohar Ior his
contin:o:s s:pport.

I wish to place on record, 2 proIo:nd thanks to Prof. Nandeesh V. Hiremath, a
highl estee2ed and disting:ished g:ide Ior his expert advice and help.

I a2 deepl thankI:l to (:r oIIice head na2e and designation )Bangalore along
with the entire H:2an Reso:rce %ea2, Ior their s:pport in the project - 2aking
the req:ired inIor2ation availa-le.

Last -:t not the least; I wo:ld like to thank 2 Parents and Friends Ior their help
and s:pport that has largel contri-:ted to the s:ccessI:l co2pletion oI the project.




Date: 25 April, 2011 Nancy Agrawal
Place: Bangalore Reg. No - 09P35G0131






CONTENTS


Sr.
No.
Topic
Page
No.
Executive Summary
1. Chapter-I
1.1 O-jective oI the Research
1.2 Research Methodolog
1.3 $election oI $t:d Area and $a2ple $ize
1.4 $igniIicance oI the $t:d
1.5 Li2itation oI the $t:d
2. Chapter-II
2.1 DeIinition oI E2ploee Engage2ent
2.2 Historical Backgro:nd oI E2ploee Engage2ent
2.3 E2ploee Engage2ent in India
3. Chapter-III
3.1 %he Literat:re Review
4. Chapter-IV
4.1 Data Analsis and Interpretation oI E2ploees
4.2 Data Analsis and Interpretation oI HR Managers
5 Chapter-VI
5.1 Findings
5.2 Reco22endations
6 Conclusion
7. References
8. Annexure


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

E2ploee engage2ent is associated with 2an desira-le o:tco2es, s:ch as jo- satisIaction,
intention to sta and jo- perIor2ance. Co2panies with a greater n:2-er oI engaged e2ploees
tpicall have lower operating costs, higher c:sto2er satisIaction and higher proIits. %here is a
tangi-le 2onetar -eneIit to co2panies investing ti2e and reso:rces in Iostering higher
engage2ent within their e2ploees. %he task oI precisel deIining e2ploee engage2ent is still
ongoing, -:t it is 2ost oIten deIined in ter2s oI -ehavio:rs exhi-ited in the workplace. Engaged
e2ploees are prepared to go the extra 2ile in p:rs:it oI workplace excellence. %he are
a2-assadors Ior their organisations, who will speak highl oI the co2pan and its people, even
when the are not in a work setting. An engaged e2ploee is identiIia-le - workplace
-ehavio:rs s:ch as losing track oI ti2e as the are so a-sor-ed in the task at hand. %his is
distinct Iro2 excessive overti2e in order to give the i2pression oI hard work.` Both look the
sa2e, -:t one is prod:ctive Ior the e2ploer- e2ploee relationship and one is not!
Acade2ics wo:ld sa that not eno:gh is :nderstood a-o:t what drives e2ploee engage2ent as
2ost research in the area has tended to Ioc:s on -:siness o:tco2es witho:t investigating
:nderling ca:ses. As the i2pact oI engage2ent on -:siness has -een positive and has -een
linked with higher proIita-ilit, practice has raced ahead oI the :nderpinning research in p:rs:it
oI creating a 2ore engaged and hence proIita-le workIorce.

I :ndertook research to aid :nderstanding oI the area - investigating the relationship -etween
e2ploee engage2ent and the retention level.

At the sa2e ti2e I looked at the interpla -etween individ:al diIIerences and engage2ent levels
oI the organization. I hoped to discover -est practices oI the organizations and the individ:al`s
expectations Iro2 s:ch strategies.







CHAPTER-1

1.1 OB1ECTIVE OF THE RESEARCH:

1. %o Iind o:t the e2ploee engage2ent strategies in organizations.
2. %o -ench2ark the e2ploee engage2ent practices adopted in vario:s organizations.
3. %o st:d the correlation -etween the e2ploee engage2ent practices carried o:t in the
co2pan and retention levels.
1.2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

TYPE OF RESEARCH: EXPLORATORY

PRIMARY DATA:

Data collection Method thro:gh Q:estionnaire Method was :sed and e2ploee responses on that
were ta-:lated and represented in percentage Ior2, which then were analzed and interpreted.
%his was Iollowed - Iindings and reco22endations.
%he q:estionnaire consisted oI -oth open ended as well as 2:ltiple choice q:estions -ased on 6
Iactors as listed -elow:
1. Attach2ent to the jo-
2. Agreea-leness
3. E2otional sta-ilit
4. Openness to experience
5. Achieve2ent orientation
6. $elI-eIIicac

%he a-ove Iactors are independent Iactors and retention oI e2ploees is dependent on it.






SECONDARY DATA:

It was thro:gh a list oI we-sites, -ooks, jo:rnals, and newspaper and news 2agazines articles as
given at the end oI this project in reIerences and -i-liograph.

HYPOTHESIS

%he engage2ent oI e2ploees is dependent on the independent Iactors.

SELECTION OF STUDY AREA AND SAMPLE SIZE
40 sa2ples oI e2ploees and 9 sa2ples oI HR 2anagers were collected Iro2 10 co2panies
na2el:
1. I Create, Bangalore
2. InIoss, Bangalore
3. %C$, Bangalore
4. Delloite ,Bangalore
5. E:reka For-es, Bangalore
6. IDBI, Bangalore
7. CGI,Bangalore
8. H$BC,Bangalore
9. A2docs, Bangalore
10.Accent:re,Bangalore

%hese co2panies were chosen as s:-ject oI st:d.









SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

People oIten lie in exit interviews a-o:t wh the are leaving. Managers sho:ld, oI co:rse, know
in advance who is leaving and wh. A co2prehensive list like this is oI little val:e :nless :sed as
a g:ide to gather inIor2ation as to how to engage the e2ploees so that to retain the talents in
the organization.

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

Age Li2itation- I had access to the o:ng e2ploees that`s wh the st:d is 2ainl on the
o:ngsters.
Fa2il iss:es- %he reason -eing I did not want to go into personal details and stick onl to jo-
and organisational related iss:es.


















CHAPTER-II

INTRODUCTION

$:ccess toda req:ires a good -it 2ore than good attendance. Yet, 2:ltiple st:dies in diIIerent
co:ntries and across ind:stries show that e2ploees who are passionate a-o:t their jo-s and the
organizations in which the work are in the 2inorit. $o2e oI the $:rve cond:cted - Iew
organization revealed that approxi2atel 19 oI the e2ploees are highl engaged %he
Corporate Exec:tive Board, looking at levels oI engage2ent across 50,000 e2ploees aro:nd the
world, placed onl 11 percent in what the d:--ed 'tr:e -eliever categor.1 %owers Perrin`s
recent '%alent Report is slightl 2ore opti2istic, Iinding j:st 17 percent oI the 35,000
e2ploees s:rveed to -e highl engaged. 40 to 70 percent oI e2ploees can -e classiIied as
ne:tral, 2iddle oI the road, or agnostic. Worse et, an alar2ing 10 to 20 percent oI e2ploees
are activel 'disengagedj:st p:tting in their ti2e or, worse et, :nder2ining or -ad2o:thing
their organizations and -osses. %he econo2ic i2pact oI low engage2ent can -e staggering.
%he glo-al s:rve shows that 34 per cent oI the e2ploees in India are I:ll engaged and 13 per
cent disengaged. As 2an as 29 per cent are al2ost engaged`.

What 2akes these n:2-ers especiall disco:raging is that, s:pposedl, we have evolved Iro2
the dark ages oI 'personnel 2anage2ent. On one hand, Ior the past two decades we have -een
tring to realize the -eneIits oI e2power2ent, tea2work, recognition, people develop2ent,
perIor2ance 2anage2ent, and new leadership stles. Evidentl, there is a -ig diIIerence
-etween p:tting in place initiatives that have the overall goal oI increasing e2ploee
engage2ent and tr:l seeing the paoIIs. And, on the other hand, one 2ight easil attri-:te low
engage2ent to persistent downsizing, which leads to an erosion oI loalt and co22it2ent.









2.1 Definition of Employee Engagement
lNI0)00 0jj0N0I lI lI0lIhl 00I00 t0N) 0 lII
0NI0)00I

Most organizations toda realize that a satisIied e2ploee is not necessaril the -est e2ploee in
ter2s oI loalt and prod:ctivit. It is onl an ACAC ! who is intellect:all
and e2otionall -o:nd with the organization who Ieels passionate a-o:t its goals and is
co22itted towards its val:es th:s he goes the extra 2ile -eond the -asic jo-. E2ploee
engage2ent is a powerI:l retention strateg. An engaged e2ploee gives his co2pan his 100
percent. When e2ploees are eIIectivel and positivel engaged with their organization, the
Ior2 an e2otional connection with the co2pan. E2ploee engage2ent is a -aro2eter that
deter2ines the association oI a person with the organisation. It is a-o:t creating the passion
a2ong associates to do things -eond what is expected Iro2 hi2.


E2ploee engage2ent can -e deIined as an e2ploee p:tting Iorth extra discretionar eIIort, as
well as the likelihood oI the e2ploee -eing loal and re2aining with the organization over the
long ha:l. Research shows that engaged e2ploees: perIor2 -etter, p:t in extra eIIorts to help
get the jo- done, show a strong level oI co22it2ent to the organization, and are 2ore 2otivated
and opti2istic a-o:t their work goals. E2ploers with engaged e2ploees tend to experience
low e2ploee t:rnover and 2ore i2pressive -:siness o:tco2es.
E2ploee engage2ent is 2ore than j:st the c:rrent HR '-:zzword'; it is essential. In order Ior
organizations to 2eet and s:rpass organizational o-jectives, e2ploees 2:st -e engaged.
Research has proven that wholl engaged e2ploees exhi-it,
O Higher selI-2otivation.
O ConIidence to express new ideas.
O Higher prod:ctivit.
O Higher levels oI c:sto2er approval and service q:alit.
O Relia-ilit.
O Organizational loalt; less e2ploee t:rnover.
O Lower a-senteeis2.



LMPL0LL LN0A0LMLN1 starts right at the seleotion stage:
O Choosing the right Iit, giving a realistic jo- preview
O $trong ind:ction and orientation progra22e
O %o keep :p the 2orale oI people and drive the2 towards excellent perIor2ance thro:gh
recognition letters, proIit sharing sche2es, long perIor2ance awards etc.
O Reg:lar Ieed-ack to all people
O Co22:nication Ior:2s like the in-ho:se 2agazine, and reg:lar s:rves and conIerences
O B helping to 2aintain the q:alit oI work-liIe and a -alance -etween
personal/proIessional lives, there are recreational activities like Iestivities, get-togethers,
sports etc.
O An open and transparent c:lt:re to e2power its people.
%he res:lt oI these practices can -e evident thro:gh the reg:lar Ieed-ack Iro2 o:r e2ploees
collected thro:gh s:rves,
aotors for igher Lmployee Lngagement
Here is a list oI so2e contri-:ting Iactors:
O Understanding oI corporate goals/2ission
O Understanding oI jo- and how it contri-:tes to overall corporate goals
O Clear co22:nication oI goals, expectations, directions
O o- design
O o- Iit
O $:pport and tools
O Independence & innovation
O Relationship with -oss/direct reports
O Clear Ieed-ack on perIor2ance
O Recognition
O Learning and develop2ent opport:nities
O Opport:nities Ior advance2ent
O Pride in organization
O E2ploee inp:t
O E2ploee involve2ent in decision 2aking
O Work-liIe -alance
O Workplace c:lt:re/2orale
O Co-worker relationships/good tea2 environ2ent (enjo colleag:es)
O Fair HR practices

Need of Employee Engagement

%he general principles oI e2ploee engage2ent have -een aro:nd Ior decades. D:ring the past
Iive ears, tho:gh, there has -een a s:rge in the pop:larit oI e2ploee engage2ent.

%here are Io:r pri2ar drivers.

1. People have become the primary source of competitive advantage. %he Brookings
Instit:te (2003) exa2ined the pri2ar so:rce oI 2arket val:e in toda`s organizations and how it
has changed over ti2e. In 1982, 62 percent oI an organization`s 2arket val:e ca2e Iro2 tangi-le
assets and 38 percent Iro2 intangi-le assets. %angi-le assets incl:de things like 2achiner,
prod:cts, Iacilities, etc. Intangi-le assets, on the other hand, incl:de Iactors s:ch as -rand,
intellect:al propert, and, 2ost i2portant, the q:alit oI the workIorce. B 2002, 20 ears later,
the so:rce oI val:e had al2ost totall Ilipped. Al2ost 80 percent oI 2arket val:e toda co2es
Iro2 the intangi-le with a scant 20 percent co2ing Iro2 tangi-le assets. As we all have heard
-eIore, prod:cts can easil -e copied, a technological edge can prove Ileeting, and 2ore Iacilities
can -e -:ilt, -:t the q:alit oI an organization`s talent, its passion and co22it2ent, is nearl
i2possi-le to replicate. Engage2ent is the I:el that drives the val:e oI intangi-le assets.

2. Retention and the war for talent. %he land2ark 1998 McKinse st:d, %he War for %alent,
was a2ong the Iirst to talk a-o:t the potential Ior workIorce shortages d:e to the aging
pop:lation. %he st:d`s a:thors called :pon organizations to take 2ore serio:sl their eIIorts to
attract and retain talent, to ass:re that the wo:ld -e a-le to s:rvive and thrive in the I:t:re. In
the late 1990s and earl 2000s, the sl:2p in the glo-al econo2 q:ickl took the spotlight oII oI
the anticipated talent shortage. And so2e predict that a portion oI toda`s aging workers will
dela their retire2ents o:t oI necessit, atten:ating the expected talent shortage. $ince 2003 the
pict:re is once again changing, al-eit not as q:ickl as expected. For exa2ple, the $ociet Ior
H:2an Reso:rces Manage2ent reported that 48 percent oI the e2ploees it polled are activel
seeking new jo-s. Additionall, the workIorce is getting older, with 2an oI the -a- -oo2ers
hitting 60 in 2006 and read to retire. Over and a-ove the workIorce cost oI increased
retire2ents, co2panies are -eginning to take heed oI the enor2o:s Iinancial costs oI t:rnover
and increasingl viewing e2ploee engage2ent as an i2perative Ior keeping their ke
e2ploees and attracting new onesas the war Ior talent heats :p once again.

3. Popular appeal. Re2e2-er the reengineering wave? Even those who :sed it as 2ore than
j:st a g:ise Ior 2assive laoIIs Io:nd it painI:l. $ix $ig2a i2ple2entations are inval:a-le to
-:siness perIor2ance, -:t 2ost co2panies are Iinding the2 too co2plex to i2ple2ent well.
Engage2ent is a diIIerent 2atter altogether. While it still takes patience to i2ple2ent,
engage2ent gets to the 'hard st:II - Ioc:sing on the 'soIter st:II. As one 2anager said: 'It`s
a-o:t appealing to the head and the heart. Engage2ent is a-o:t creating passion, it`s a-o:t
Ioc:sing on what people do well, and it`s a-o:t develop2ent and recognition. $o2e have called
e2ploee engage2ent a Ior2 oI positive pscholog which, on the whole, is an eas pill Ior
organizations and their e2ploees to swallow.
4. Overwhelming impact. %he h:2an reso:rces I:nction has -een :nder press:re Ior decades to
prove that it 2akes a diIIerence. While CEOs 2a espo:se the i2portance oI their workIorces in
their ann:al reports, when ti2es get to:gh, HR is a2ong the Iirst to get the -:dget axe. Wh? A
lack oI convincing evidence on the val:e oI HR initiatives. HR proIessionals are scra2-ling,
according to a recent ConIerence Board report, to prove that their activities and invest2ents are
-oth eIIicient and positivel inIl:ential to -:siness strateg.%he positive relationship -etween
engage2ent and perIor2ance (doc:2ented in h:ndreds oI st:dies, with the evidence 2o:nting
ever da) provides a wa Ior HR to prove its contri-:tion. It`s a Iact: %he higher the level oI
engage2ent, the higher the perIor2ance oI the -:siness. %he research is not inconcl:sive, not
li2ited to one co:ntr or ind:str, and not contained to a Iew h:ndred peopleit`s
overwhel2ing.
How to Make Employees Engage
O Growth and development - An exciting position, with plent oI opport:nit Ior growth,
learning, and advance2ent Ior e2ploees is alwas helpI:l in retaining e2ploees.
O Support and recognition - Giving those rewards and recognition.
O In 2an instances, e2ploee retention starts j:st as soon as an e2ploee is hired. II a
co2pan sees an :n:s:al a2o:nt oI potential in a new hire, 2anage2ent co:ld 2ake
the2 Ieel appreciated right oII the -at. In a wa, this practice can -e considered a
co2-ination oI recr:it2ent and retention tools.
O E2ploee Participation in decision 2aking is also a ver eIIective engage2ent activit in
the organization.
O Aligning effort with strategyEngage2ent -egins with e2ploees` clear :nderstanding
oI what the sho:ld -e doing on the jo-. Each e2ploee needs a solid jo- description and
a clear set oI perIor2ance expectations.
O EmpowermentE2power2ent is a Ieeling oI jo- ownership and co22it2ent -ro:ght
a-o:t thro:gh the a-ilit to 2ake decisions, -e responsi-le, -e 2eas:red - res:lts, and
-e recognized as a tho:ghtI:l, contri-:ting h:2an -eing rather than a pair oI hands doing
what others sa.
O Teamwork and Collaboration - In the context oI engage2ent, tea2work and
colla-oration req:ire good relationships -oth within the work gro:p and across work
gro:ps. Man organizations have strong tea2s with 2e2-ers who work well with each
other.
The Benefits of Employee Engagement
%he power oI e2ploee engage2ent is that it is closel connected to -:siness res:lts. When
e2ploees work in an environ2ent in which the can Ioc:s their attention on their work and
have a drive to do their -est, organizations experience higher levels oI productivity and
profitability. Engaged e2ploees look Ior -etter was to do their work, spend less ti2e on
wasted activities, and 2ake eIIective :se oI reso:rces. In the end, co2panies deliver -etter
prod:cts or services and have 2ore reso:rces leIt to invest in I:rther i2prove2ents. Altho:gh it
is an i2portant consideration, high Iinancial co2pensation is not the onl driver oI increased
e2ploee retention. As addressed previo:sl, e2ploees decide to sta with organizations Ior
other reasons, s:ch as growth and develop2ent opport:nities, strong leadership, and 2eaningI:l
work. %:rnover costs organizations 2illions oI dollars each ear, and engage2ent has a proven
relationship to e2ploee retention. No one likes going into a store where the sales clerks are
s:llen, a-sent, or :ncooperative. It`s eas to see wh c:sto2ers notice engaged e2ploees and
are 2ore satisIied and willing to p:rchase again. For exa2ple,%o2 La-adie, director oI training
and develop2ent at Co2pU$A states,'When o: walk into a store with high engage2ent scores,
o: can sense the positive tone. E2ploees whistle and s2ile, the approach c:sto2ers, and the
store gives oII that el:sive approacha-le Ieeling that c:sto2ers appreciate. Organizations with
engaged e2ploees have 2ore satisfied customers, -:t it`s not j:st -eca:se e2ploees have
-etter interactions with c:sto2ers. Engaged e2ploees are 2ore likel to i2prove other critical
Iactors aIIecting c:sto2er satisIaction, s:ch as responsiveness, prod:ct q:alit, tho:ght
leadership, innovation, etc. Finall, higher engage2ent translates into higher and faster revenue
growth. Engaged e2ploees are 2ore innovative and place 2ore e2phasis on 2eeting c:sto2er
needs. %he 'what can I do -etter or diIIerentl attit:de oI engaged e2ploees vers:s the 'it`s
not in 2 jo- description attit:de oI the :nengaged si2pl leads to -etter Iinancial
perIor2ance.
ASSESSING ENGAGEMENT
Over the past eight ears, %he Gall:p Organisation has -een cond:cting exha:stive st:dies oI
e2ploee engage2ent to tr and answer these I:nda2ental q:estions. One oI a handI:l oI
engage2ent evangelists, Gall:p has pro2oted the val:e oI 2eas:ring e2ploee engage2ent
thro:gh a series oI -ooks, se2inars and progra22es; it has also taken the lead in identiIing and
2anaging the Iactors that i2pact engage2ent levels.
In order to rate the engage2ent oI a workIorce, Iirst Gall:p assesses e2ploees to deter2ine
whether the are engaged, not engaged or activel disengaged.
Engaged e2ploees are the stars in a co2pan. Passionate a-o:t what the do, the Ieel a strong
connection to their co2pan and perIor2 at high levels ever da while looking Ior was to
i2prove the2selves and the co2pan as a whole.
Not engaged e2ploees, according to Gall:p, are the co2pan zo2-ies who show :p ever da
and p:t in j:st eno:gh eIIort to 2eet the -asic req:ire2ents oI their jo-s. Witho:t passion or
innovation, these e2ploees neither co22it to the co2pan`s direction, nor do the work
against it.
Activel disengaged e2ploees are those who present a -ig pro-le2 Ior -:sinesses. Negative -
nat:re, these people are :nhapp in their work and the co2po:nd their lack oI prod:ctivit -
sharing this :nhappiness with those aro:nd the2. %he are the prover-ial -ad apples who revel
in their discontent while :nder2ining the acco2plish2ents oI others; as a res:lt, not onl do
the achieve little the2selves, the also prevent others Iro2 -eing prod:ctive too.







2.2 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT
Over the past decade, the wa in which people are 2anaged and developed at work has co2e to
-e recognized as one oI the pri2ar Iactors in achieving i2prove2ent in organizational
perIor2ance. %his is reIlected - pop:lar idio2s s:ch as 'people are o:r 2ost i2portant assets.
Back in the good old das oI corporate world, things were prett si2ple. Co2panies p:t people
on career tracks straight o:t oI college; the gave e2ploees a jo- Ior liIe and waved the2
good-e with a gold watch at retire2ent. %he pro2ise oI the sta-le liIe as a co2pan e2ploee
kept -oth 2orale and prod:ctivit high.
%hen things changed. Co2petition increased, 2argins shrank and shareholders got 2ore
de2anding. $:ddenl, co2pan staII were Iinding the ver jo- sec:rit the`d co:nted on was
disappearing, and at speed. %his :pheaval 2eant co2panies had to Iind new was to 2otivate
their e2ploees in order to 2ake the2 2ore prod:ctive since, witho:t sta-ilit, e2ploees were
looking Ior so2ething else Iro2 their e2ploers. And th:s, Engage2ent was -orn.
In itselI, engage2ent isn`t reall a new idea; owners and 2anagers have -een talking a-o:t
engage2ent, in one Ior2 or another, Ior cent:ries. the j:st :sed diIIerent words to express it.
In Ior2er ti2es, engage2ent Ioc:sed 2ore on prod:ctivit and achieving res:lts thro:gh threat
oI p:nish2ent or - 2eans oI reward. B:t co22on sense - and good co22:nication -
event:all won o:t and, toda, organizations everwhere are spending serio:s 2one on all
Ior2s oI e2ploee engage2ent. Boiled down, it si2pl 2eans developing a happ and loal
workIorce`. Enlightened 2anagers now realize that an co2pan as a whole will -eneIit when
its e2ploees know what`s going on and the Ieel part oI the tea2. %he trick part is in deIining
what 2akes a workIorce happ, and in :nderstanding how this good will translates into co2pan
s:ccess.
Fro2 the extant literat:re review, it is acknowledged that s:ccessI:l organizations share a
I:nda2ental philosoph oI val:ing and investing in their e2ploees. In Iact 2an research
st:dies have descri-ed h:2an reso:rce 2anage2ent as a 2eans oI achieving co2petitive
advantage. Consistent with this it is an eq:all i2portant iss:e Ior the organization to retain their
critical (core) e2ploees. Most organization toda contin:es to str:ggle with retention -eca:se
the are reling on salar increases and -on:ses to prevent t:rnover. Essentiall 2ore
organizations are now realizing that retention is a strategic iss:e and contin:es to -e a
co2petitive advantage.
%he ter2 'engage2ent ste2s Iro2 the work oI Kahn (1990) who disting:ished -etween -eing
engaged and disengaged at work. P:tting the h:2anistic Iactors together, Beer, $pecter,
Lawrence, Q:inn-Mills and Walton (1984) created the Harvard B:siness $chool` 2odel oI
HRM which Ioc:sed on people in an organization to -e the ke reso:rce. In light oI s:ch critical
e2phasis -eing placed on h:2an capital, Pa:la Ketter has aptl noted, 'Engage2ent is all a-o:t
creating a c:lt:re where people do not Ieel 2is:sed, over:sed, :nder:sed or a-:sed.

At a ver -asic level, e2ploee engage2ent draws Iro2 the tenets oI the Hierarch oI Needs` as
concept:alized - Maslow, the highest stage oI which is selI-act:alization; the pinnacle oI an
individ:al`s I:lIill2ent oI talent and potential. %his theor oI higher order needs` was largel
overlooked in the hedas oI scientiIic asse2-l line` 2an:Iact:ring.




















2.3 EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT IN INDIA

%he recent Work Asia research st:d - Watson Watt Worldwide indicates that India has the
highest percentage oI highl engaged workers at 78 in Asia as co2pared to apan, which has
the lowest e2ploee engage2ent level at 39.
Head to head with China, the engage2ent level oI the Indian worker is 20 2ore than his
Chinese co:nterpart. %hese are all enco:raging signs - -:t the challenges and the opport:nities
ahead are 2aniIold. %he i22inent U$ slowdown, shrinking oI talent pool, slowdown in hiring,
larger e2ploee expectations are all challenges Ior internal co22:nicators to cope with. %he
Gall:p Organization descri-es e2ploee engage2ent as the "the involve2ent with and
enth:sias2 Ior work".
%he challenges Iaced - organizations in India are aro:nd attrition, co22:nication, career
develop2ent and engage2ent while tring to keep pace with the explosive growth. O:tso:rcing
o:tIits have the highest attrition rates losing staII at a rate oI -etween 100 and 200 a ear. It
is widel -elieved that organizations spend an average oI 36 oI their reven:es on their
e2ploees -:t do not have a tangi-le wa to 2eas:re its i2pact.
A Mercer st:d What`s Working` a series oI national research on worker insights, highlights
Iactors that 2ake a diIIerence to e2ploee engage2ent. %he s:rve`s 125 q:estions elicit views
in the areas deIined - Mercer`s H:2an Capital $trateg Model and cover training and
develop2ent, work environ2ent, leadership, perIor2ance 2anage2ent, work/liIe -alance,
co22:nication, co2pensation, -eneIits, and engage2ent.
%he India st:d throws :p so2e Iascinating directions Ior HR and internal co22:nication
proIessionals. E2ploee engage2ent is no 2ore j:st a-o:t the e2ploee`s intent to leave. %he
e2ploee`s co22it2ent to the organization and 2otivation to contri-:te to the organization`s
s:ccess plas a signiIicant role. %he top three drivers in India are tr:st in senior 2anage2ent,
how the organization is perceived Ior c:sto2er service and Iair pa. $:rprisingl, Iro2 an Indian
context, the least val:ed Iactors in the contin::2 were -eneIits, co2pensation and perIor2ance
2anage2ent.
In India, having a long-ter2 career is considered positive and sta-le. Freq:ent jo- changes are
viewed negativel and thereIore the high scores aro:nd the co22it2ent co:nt are in line with
the 2indset.
Internal co22:nication and HR proIessionals need to take note oI the e2ploee`s need Ior
giving Ieed-ack and to o-serve action taken Iro2 this. E2ploees see2 to -e getting ver little
inIor2ation on the organization`s vision and I:t:re plans, a ca:se oI concern. Other areas Ior
action incl:de the organization`s rep:tation in the 2arket congr:ent to other research in this
space which -elieves that organization`s which are sociall responsi-le are considered -etter
places to work. In the talent 2anage2ent -racket, 2anagers Iare poorl Ior their involve2ent,
:nderstanding and s:pport as well as Ior 2erit -ased appraisals.
In India, with a large n:2-er oI glo-al plaers entering the 2arket, the talent pool has now a
plethora oI choices and even these 2:ltinationals are Iinding it to:gh to retain staII. %he
Canadian HR Reporter writes that e2ploees want to know where their careers are heading and
that is a critical co2ponent oI the talent retention strateg organizations need to Ioc:s on. $oIter
stles oI leadership have a -etter i2pact in India and China leaving organizations to develop or
seek leaders who can Iill this need.









Chapter-III
3.1 THE LITERATURE REVIEW
E2ploee retention contin:es to re2ain a top priorit at 2an organizations and one that
co2panies increasingl view as a driver oI -:siness strateg. B:siness-critical knowledge can
walk o:t the door when an e2ploee leaves the co2pan. While e2ploee retention Iig:res have
long -een :sed - co2panies as a 2eas:re oI their perIor2ance in developing an eIIective
organization, this view oI e2ploee retention is not onl o:tdated, -:t these Iig:res 2a not -e
co2prehensive eno:gh to tr:l deter2ine the organization's eIIectiveness.
%he concept oI e2ploee retention is 2ore co2plex than si2pl eval:ating e2ploee t:rnover
Iro2 one ear to the next. %hese Iig:res oI e2ploee retention can -e so2ewhat 2isleading it
isn't necessaril the n:2-er oI e2ploees an organization loses, it's the n:2-er oI top-
perIor2ing e2ploees that leave the co2pan that sho:ld -e oI concern. For exa2ple,
2anage2ent is one oI the ke reasons e2ploees decide to sta or leave an organization. II there
is high t:rnover a2ong the 2anage2ent ranks, e2ploees 2a also Ieel :nsta-le in this ever-
changing environ2ent. Yet, on the other hand, it 2a not -e the -est -:siness strateg to retain a
2anager that is disliked - e2ploees.
%he -:siness strateg oI e2ploee retention act:all lies with e2ploee engage2ent; retention is
an o:tco2e oI engage2ent. What 2ost organizations Iail to realize is that e2ploee engage2ent
is the -iggest retention Iactor the have control over. Engaged e2ploees not onl sta longer
with the organization, the are 2ore prod:ctive, 2ore conscientio:s, 2ake Iewer errors, and take
-etter care oI c:sto2ers. %he -:siness strateg oI e2ploee retention 2:st incorporate 2ethods
that achieve a high level oI e2ploee engage2ent a2ong the organization's top perIor2ers, not
necessaril the entire workIorce.

The Importance of Retaining Top Performers
Man organizations ponder the q:estions, "What sho:ld the goal -e Ior retention?" and "What is
an appropriate level Ior e2ploee t:rnover?" Yet, in asking these q:estions, 2an organizations
don't realize that there are no set answers. II, Ior exa2ple, an organization loses Iive percent oI
its top perIor2ers ever ear, the res:lts Iro2 this t:rnover co:ld -e potentiall devastating to
the co2pan. On the other hand, iI the co2pan is losing 20 percent oI its least prod:ctive
e2ploees, this co:ld act:all -e ver -eneIicial Ior the organization and an opport:nit to
increase the strength oI its workIorce each ear.
In other words, it's not j:st a-o:t retention an2ore it's a-o:t retaining the ver -est people at
each level within the organization. %he ke to eIIective retention oI top perIor2ers is to
deter2ine the Iactors that c:rrentl do, and will, keep the2 engaged.
%he $tarting Point an organization 2:st Iirst deter2ine who the top perIor2ers and high
potentials are within their workIorce. OI the 2an was this can -e acco2plished, so2e incl:de
involving 2anage2ent at ever level to create a list oI those e2ploees who are perIor2ing at
levels that exceed expectations and those who exhi-it the potential to -eco2e top perIor2ers, or
:tilizing the res:lts Iro2 e2ploee perIor2ance reviews to separate those who scored the
highest Iro2 those who scored the lowest.
%his 2ethod oI gaining a clear :nderstanding oI who the top perIor2ers are within an
organization is called e2ploee seg2entation. Once an organization has seg2ented its
workIorce, it can then start to 2eas:re retention a2ong its highest potential and highest rated, or
2ost prod:ctive, e2ploees. B viewing each seg2ent separatel, organizations are creating a
2ore appropriate -ench2ark to 2eas:re e2ploee retention, i.e., is the organization retaining or
losing a high percentage oI its -est people?

Understanding Employee Engagement
E2ploee engage2ent can -e deIined as an e2ploee p:tting Iorth extra discretionar eIIort, as
well as the likelihood oI the e2ploee -eing loal and re2aining with the organization over the
long ha:l. Research shows that engaged e2ploees: perIor2 -etter, p:t in extra eIIorts to help
get the jo- done, show a strong level oI co22it2ent to the organization, and are 2ore 2otivated
and opti2istic a-o:t their work goals. E2ploers with engaged e2ploees tend to experience
low e2ploee t:rnover and 2ore i2pressive -:siness o:tco2es.
E2ploee engage2ent is 2ore than j:st the c:rrent HR '-:zzword'; it is essential. In order Ior
organizations to 2eet and s:rpass organizational o-jectives, e2ploees 2:st -e engaged.
Research has proven that wholl engaged e2ploees exhi-it,
Higher selI-2otivation.
ConIidence to express new ideas.
Higher prod:ctivit.
Higher levels oI c:sto2er approval and service q:alit.
Relia-ilit.
Organizational loalt; less e2ploee t:rnover.
Lower a-senteeis2.
C:rrent st:dies show that organizations are Ioc:sing on the 2eaning oI e2ploee engage2ent
and how to 2ake e2ploees 2ore engaged. E2ploees Ieel engaged when the Iind personal
2eaning and 2otivation in their work, receive positive interpersonal s:pport, and operate in an
eIIicient work environ2ent. What -ro:ght engage2ent to the IoreIront and wh is everone
interested in it? Most likel, the tight econo2 has reIoc:sed attention on 2axi2izing e2ploee
o:tp:t and 2aking the 2ost oI organizational reso:rces. When organizations Ioc:s attention on
their people, the are 2aking an invest2ent in their 2ost i2portant reso:rce. Yo: can c:t all the
costs o: want, -:t iI o: neglect o:r people, c:tting costs won`t 2ake 2:ch oI a diIIerence.
Engage2ent is all a-o:t getting e2ploees to 'give it their all. $o2e oI the 2ost s:ccessI:l
organizations are known Ior their :niq:e work environ2ents in which e2ploees are 2otivated
to do their ver -est. %hese great places to work have -een recognized in s:ch lists as Fort:ne`s
100 Best Co2panies to Work For.
%he concept oI engage2ent is a nat:ral evol:tion oI past research on high-involve2ent,
e2power2ent, jo- 2otivation, organizational co22it2ent, and tr:st. All oI these research
strea2s Ioc:s on the perceptions and attit:des oI e2ploees a-o:t the work environ2ent. In
so2e was, there are variations on the sa2e I:nda2ental iss:e. What predicts e2ploees 'giving
their all? O-vio:sl, all organizations want their e2ploees to -e engaged in their work.

Hierarchy of Engagement



Employee Engagement at Each Level
In addition, e2ploee seg2entation is an i2portant 2ethod to :tilize when eval:ating e2ploee
engage2ent at each level. For instance, the Iactors that engage the 2ost prod:ctive e2ploees in
an organization 2a not -e the sa2e as the Iactors that engage the least prod:ctive e2ploees.
%hose e2ploees who receive the highest rankings on their perIor2ance reviews 2a tend to
express higher levels oI jo- satisIaction when the are presented with challenging opport:nities
that allow the2 to grow and learn. %hose that receive the lowest rankings 2ight -e 2ore Ioc:sed
on iss:es s:rro:nding work/liIe -alance and jo- sec:rit. While so2e Iactors, s:ch as good
co22:nication, are i2portant a2ong all e2ploees, the atte2pt to Ioc:s on the I:ll spectr:2 oI
Iactors that engage the entire workIorce 2a ca:se an organization to o2it so2e oI the Iactors
that are the 2ost i2portant to the co2pan's 2ost prod:ctive people.

Employee Satisfaction Does Not Equal Engagement
While organizations 2a -e aware "thro:gh the grapevine" that e2ploees are :nsatisIied, it's
the reasons Ior the dissatisIaction that el:de the2. While e2ploee satisIaction is i2portant, it's
not the end ga2e it is onl one piece oI e2ploee engage2ent. $atisIaction is i2perative in
that, Ior those individ:als who are top perIor2ers, satisIaction 2a -e derived Iro2 their
achieve2ent orientation, their a2-ition, or their sense oI responsi-ilit. On the other hand, the
atte2pt to satisI an :nder-perIor2er who will onl -e content with a lightened workload 2a
not -e a worth ca:se. Again, the Ioc:s is on ens:ring that those individ:als who have -een
identiIied as top perIor2ers and high potentials are engaged in the organization.
As stated, e2ploee engage2ent incorporates e2ploee satisIaction, -:t also incl:des the
essential ele2ents oI pride, co22it2ent and loalt in the organization. Engaged e2ploees
aren't concerned with 2eeting the 2ini2:2 req:ire2ents to co2plete a task, the are Ioc:sed on
what the can do to -etter the co2pan. Essentiall, the take ownership in the co2pan despite
whether or not the act:all own a share oI stock.

Drivers of engagement
O A two-wa relationship -etween the e2ploer and e2ploee
O %he i2portance oI the individ:al -eing a-le to align the2selves to the prod:cts,
O services and val:es oI the organisation
O %he a-ilit oI the organisation to co22:nicate its vision, strateg, o-jectives
O and val:es to its staII so that the are clearl :nderstood
O Manage2ent give staII s:IIicient el-ow roo2` and a:tono2 to let the2 I:lIil their
potential
O %he e2ploer is highl eIIective at engaging in two-wa co22:nication with
O its staII, in partic:lar enco:raging :pward co22:nication
O Lastl, that 2anage2ent Iro2 the top to the -otto2 oI the organisation are co22itted
leaders` and that the ke role oI the i22ediate line 2anager/s:pervisor is recognised as
one oI the 2ost i2portant cond:its to achieving eIIective e2ploee engage2ent.















Elements of Engagement
$o2e researches concl:de that personal i2pact, Ioc:sed work, and interpersonal har2on
co2prise engage2ent. Each oI these three co2ponents has s:--co2ponents that I:rther deIine
the 2eaning oI engage2ent.
Personal I2pact-E2ploees Ieel 2ore engaged when the are a-le to 2ake a :niq:e
contri-:tion, experience e2power2ent, and have opport:nities Ior personal growth. Past
research conc:rs that iss:es s:ch as the a-ilit to i2pact the work environ2ent and 2aking
2eaningI:l choices in the workplace are critical co2ponents oI e2ploee e2power2ent. $o2e
research on retaining talent Io:nd that the perception oI 2eaningI:l work is one oI the 2ost
inIl:ential Iactors deter2ining e2ploees` willingness to sta with the organization.
Foc:sed Work-E2ploees Ieel 2ore engaged when the have clear direction, perIor2ance
acco:nta-ilit, and an eIIicient work environ2ent. Aside Iro2 the personal drive and 2otivation
to 2ake a contri-:tion, e2ploees need to :nderstand where to Ioc:s their eIIorts. Witho:t a
clear strateg and direction Iro2 senior leadership, e2ploees will waste their ti2e on the
activities that do not 2ake a diIIerence Ior the organization`s s:ccess. Additionall, even when
direction is in place, e2ploees 2:st receive Ieed-ack to ens:re that the are on track and -eing
held acco:nta-le Ior their progress. In partic:lar, e2ploees need to Ieel that low perIor2ance is
not accepta-le and that there are conseq:ences Ior poor perIor2ance. Finall, e2ploees want to
work in an environ2ent that is eIIicient in ter2s oI its ti2e, reso:rces, and -:dget. E2ploees
lose Iaith in the organization when the see excessive waste. For exa2ple, e2ploees -eco2e
Ir:strated when the are asked to operate witho:t the necessar reso:rces or waste ti2e in
:nnecessar 2eetings.
Interpersonal Har2on-E2ploees Ieel 2ore engaged when the work in a saIe and cooperative
environ2ent. B saIet, we 2ean that e2ploee tr:st one another and q:ickl resolve conIlicts
when the arise. E2ploees want to -e a-le to rel on each other and Ioc:s their attention on the
tasks that reall 2atter. ConIlict wastes ti2e and energ and needs to -e dealt with q:ickl.
$o2e researches also Iind that tr:st and interpersonal har2on is a I:nda2ental :nderling
principle in the -est organizations. E2ploees also need to cooperate to get the jo- done.
Partnerships across depart2ents and within the work gro:p ens:re that e2ploees sta inIor2ed
and get the s:pport the need to do their jo-s.

Making Use of Engagement
Meas:re2ent oI e2ploee engage2ent can have 2an applications in the organization. Earlier,
it is 2entioned that engage2ent co:ld serve as a general index oI HR eIIectiveness in an HR
scorecard. Also, engage2ent 2eas:res serve as an eas wa to -ench2ark the work cli2ate
against other organizations.
Other :ses incl:de:
Needs Analsis-%he I:nda2ental iss:es 2eas:red in engage2ent provide a q:ick index oI what
leaders and HR need to do to 2ake things -etter. In addition, ite2s in engage2ent s:rves tend
to -e ver actiona-le. %his 2eans that leaders or others in the organization can take action that
will aIIect the score on a single ite2.
Eval:ation-Man learning and perIor2ance interventions are designed to i2pact so2e aspect oI
engage2ent. When an engage2ent 2eas:re is :sed as a pre-i2ple2entation -aseline, the i2pact
oI the intervention can -e ga:ged - 2eas:ring post-i2ple2entation changes in engage2ent.
Cli2ate $:rve-$o2e organizations like to :se engage2ent 2eas:res as si2ple indexes oI the
workplace c:lt:re. While 2ore extensive s:rves are val:a-le, so2eti2es it`s easier to Ioc:s
attention on a Iew si2ple and proven Iactors.
Leader or Depart2ent Feed-ack-Depending on the de2ographic inIor2ation collected when the
engage2ent 2eas:re is i2ple2ented, one can create -reako:t reports - depart2ent or leader.
%his 2eans depart2ents and leaders can gain a -etter :nderstanding oI how engage2ent in their
gro:ps diIIers Iro2 the rest oI the organization. %his inIor2ation can -e :sed to create
develop2ent plans or plans Ior larger-scale interventions.
Measuring the Impact of Employee Engagement





BENCHMARKING BEST PRACTICES

HSBC
%he co2panies tr to 2ake a 2atch oI it - positioning their organisations as a I:n workplace`
to engage e2ploees. $peaking to the o:th in the lang:age the :nderstand, co2panies
organise dress down` das -ased on Iestival the2es, distri-:te soIt sports eq:ip2ent which can
-e :sed inside the processing Iloor and organise reg:lar trips to 2ovies as well as dining o:t.
Acknowledging that recognising e2ploees Ior a jo- well done is a ke retention tool, HSBC
has reg:lar rewards and recognition progra22es where o:tstanding agents get to -ask in the
glor oI their achieve2ents. Leadership develop2ent is taken ver serio:sl with Iirst line
2anagers getting to hone their skills in vario:s tools req:ired to lead a tea2 s:ccessI:ll.
E2power2ent is a ke ingredient in engaging e2ploees and ens:ring the sta that wa. On
c:e al2ost all BPO o:tIits organise reg:lar Ioc:s gro:p disc:ssions and interaction with the
senior 2anage2ent to ens:re everone is heard. Internal co22:nication channels like intranets
and 2essage -oards are li-erall :sed to reach o:t and -randed goodies are reg:larl distri-:ted
to Ioster a sense oI -elonging




Sun Microsystems
At $:n the virt:al nat:re is partl d:e to Ilexi-le working practices. While Ilexi-le working
arrange2ents are a pl:s Ior 2an e2ploees and red:ces Iacilit costs Ior the organization, that
Ilexi-ilit co2es with so2e downsides like; isolation, loneliness and an increase in personal
distractions. Isolation, especiall when paired with the de2ands oI work in an increasingl
co2petitive environ2ent, can wear down the sense oI connection, co22it2ent and excite2ent
a-o:t an jo-. %h:s a critical challenge Ior 2anagers oI virt:al tea2s is how to keep re2ote
e2ploees engaged.

At $:n, the concept oI e2ploee engage2ent starts right Iro2 the top:
%he CEO interacts with $:n e2ploees thro:gh W$UN, a Ior:2 on $:n`s intranet. He :ses this
to s:stain an active an ongoing dialog:e on the corporate goals and direction. %hro:gh this
interactive on-line reso:rce he also solicits their Ieed-ack and opinions

Other senior 2anage2ent 2e2-ers engages with e2ploees on technolog directions thro:gh
his personal -log
B:siness Unit Heads and Exec:tive Vice-presidents have a target oI holding six town halls`
with e2ploees ever ear across the glo-e
At the co:ntr level, $enior Manage2ent is tasked with constantl engaging e2ploees thro:gh
vario:s Ior:2s, co22:nication 2edia and events to -:ild excite2ent and passion incl:ding
so2e that also reach o:t to the e2ploees` Ia2ilies.

Standard Chartered Group
%he -elieve in the i2portance oI -:ilding a work environ2ent where ever e2ploee Ieels
highl engaged to appl their individ:al talents to deliver s:staina-le -:siness perIor2ance.
%he have -een 2eas:ring e2ploee engage2ent worldwide since 2000 with a vol:ntar
response rate consistentl over 95. In 2007, the s:rve covered all 57 co:ntries with 95 oI
e2ploees participating vol:ntaril. %his is a signiIicant achieve2ent and a clear indication that
e2ploees are co22itted to i2proving individ:al and tea2 perIor2ance.
%he have a contin:o:s rise in -oth the n:2-er oI engaged e2ploees and tea2s since the
s:rve was introd:ced. We provide tea2-speciIic data to each 2anager, which the :se to
disc:ss and develop action plans with their tea2s to increase engage2ent



Conclusion
%he co2petition Ior talent 2eans that we have to -e ver good at attracting, 2otivating and
retaining talent. O:r talented h:2an capital is o:r -iggest asset and lia-ilit and we need to
2eas:re how well it`s adding val:e. Engage2ent is an increasingl i2portant h:2an capital
2etric -eca:se:
Engage2ent levels correlate with -:siness perIor2ance
Meas:ring Engage2ent tells :s how well we are doing in the co2petition Ior
talent
Driving Engage2ent levels higher i2proves o:r a-ilit to attract, 2otivate and
retain talent and so generates val:e Iro2 o:r h:2an capital invest2ent.

Engage2ent is not a si2ple 2atter. Nothing is 2ore dangero:s than 2eas:ring engage2ent
witho:t 2aking the co22it2ent to act on the Ieed-ack. Engage2ent has to -e a leadership-
driven initiative Iro2 the 2ost senior level all the wa to the Iront line. No one aIIects an
e2ploee`s engage2ent as 2:ch as his or her i22ediate leader. Engaged leaders coach
proactivel Ior s:ccess, inspire loalt and tr:st, and -:ild an environ2ent in which e2ploees
are 2otivated and engaged. %o Ioster an environ2ent oI engage2ent, organizations need strong
sste2s and strategies that pro2ote and s:pport engage2ent. Hiring and selection sste2s that
2eas:re 2otivation and the propensit Ior engage2ent, leadership training in certain skills
(coaching, inIl:encing others, 2anaging change), perIor2ance 2anage2ent and acco:nta-ilit
sste2s that provide direction, s:pport, and o-jective assess2entsall work together to provide
a Io:ndation and environ2ent in which engage2ent can Ilo:rish. Ulti2atel, engage2ent lies in
the heart oI the e2ploee. Meas:ring 2otivational and jo- Iit d:ring the hiring process ens:res
that o: select people who can and want to Iind 2eaning in their work. $o2e people have
personal characteristics that correlate with higher levels oI engage2ent, and those characteristics
can -e screened Ior d:ring the hiring process. Once o:`ve hired the right people, engage2ent
can -e either I:elled or ha2pered - the work environ2ent and q:alit oI leadership. B:ilding
an engaged workIorce is a long-ter2, ongoing initiative. Beca:se it req:ires a coordinated,
consistent eIIort Iro2 leaders, organizational sste2s, and individ:als, it 2:st -e aligned and
linked with the 2ost i2portant organizational -:siness drivers, or it will get p:shed aside - the
dail press oI work, and lang:ish. In the end, the rewards are 2an. A I:ll engaged workIorce
is a loal workIorceexpect t:rnover to drop. In addition, an engaged workIorce will give the
extra eIIort o:r organization needs to re2ain co2petitive.
E2ploee engage2ent is no longer j:st a -:zzword or a 2anage2ent Iad.
CHAPTER-IV
4.1 DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF EMPLOYEES
Q1. Do o: know what is expected oI o: at work?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Analysis:



68 oI the sa2ple agreed to the Iact that the are aware a-o:t the work which the have to
perIor2 while 32 are strongl agree on this Iact.












"2 At work, do o: have the opport:nit to do what o: do -est ever da?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Analysis:



Majorit (53) oI the e2ploees get the opport:nit to do -est oI their work everda while
28 oI the2 disagreed on this and 18 oI the2 strongl agreed.















"3 In the last three 2onths, have o: received recognition or praise Ior doing good work?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Analysis:



84 oI the e2ploees have received recognition or praise in the last three 2onths Ior doing
good work while 11 oI the e2ploees are highl satisIied with recognition in their organization
and 5 oI the2 has not received an praise in the last 3 2onths.














"4 Is there so2eone at work who enco:rages o:r develop2ent?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Analysis:



Generall people Ieel sense oI -elongingness when so2eone is their at their workplace to
s:pport the2 and 84 oI the e2ploees agreed on this Iact while 8 have strongl agreed and
the other 8 disagreed.














"5 At work, do o:r opinions see2 to co:nt?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le


Analysis:



E2ploees participation in decision 2aking is again a criteria oI 2eas:ring e2ploee
engage2ent. 87 oI the e2ploees have agreed that their decision see2s to co:nt, 10 strongl
agreed to this and onl 3 have disagreed.













"6 Are o:r associates (Iellow e2ploees) co22itted to doing q:alit work?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le


Analysis:



79 oI the sa2ple agreed that their Iellow e2ploees are co22itted to do q:alit work while
11 have disagreed on this Iact. 5 oI the2 have chosen strongl on this and the other 5 has
given no co22ents on this.













"7 In the last ear, have o: had opport:nities at work to learn and grow?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Analysis:



Learning and Develop2ent is one oI the 2ost i2portant aspect to Iind o:t the e2ploee
engage2ent in the organization. 66 have agreed that the get the opport:nit to learn and grow
in the organization while 21 oI the2 have strongl agreed on it. 8 oI the e2ploee have not
given an repl and 5 were disagree.













"8 Are the pa and -eneIits in o:r organization co2para-le to si2ilar co2panies?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Analysis:


42 oI the sa2ple is satisIied with pa and packages oI their organization while 32 are
highl satisIied with it. 16 disagree on the co2petitive pa and -eneIit packages.
















" Are jo- pro2otions in this organization Iair and o-jective?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le


Analysis:


HalI the percentage (50) oI the e2ploees -elieve that the pro2otions are done o-jectivel,
31 strongl agree to the Iairness oI the sa2e while 13 do:-t the Iairness and o-jectivit oI
the process.














"10. Are organization policies clearl co22:nicated in the organization?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Analsis:


47 oI the sa2ple has agreed to -e clear on the policies that prevail in their respective
organizations. A good proportion oI 42 strongl agreed on the clarit while onl 11 reported
a2-ig:it on the policies.















"11. Do o: see o:rselI contin:ing to work Ior this organization two ears Iro2 now?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Analysis:


A 2ajorit oI 50 has agreed to contin:e to serve in the sa2e organization Ior next two ears,
24 are ver 2:ch willing to do the sa2e whereas a stricking 26 oI the e2ploees are those
who are on the verge to leave the organization since the are not even co22iting Ior next two
ears.














"12. Do o: reco22end o:r Iriends/relatives in o:r organization?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Analysis:


24 oI the sa2ple s:rveed strongl -elieve in reco22ending Iriends and relatives to their
organizations, 63 agreed to this while 13 has disregarded the option.















"13. $elect and rank the Iollowing engage2ent tools applica-le in o:r organization. Please rate
the options, Iro2 1- 8 (1 -eing the lowest and 8 -eing the highest).
a) $tress Manage2ent
-) Work liIe -alance
c) Career develop2ent
d) E2ploees Participation in decision 2aking
e) Co:nselling/ Feed-ack
I) Rewards and Recognition $che2es
g) E2ploee ReIerral $che2e
h) Retire2ent Plans
Analysis:


Rewards and recognition sche2es to -e the 2ost pop:lar engage2ent tool a2ongst the
e2ploees, next is eIIorts on Career develo2ent. E2ploee participation in decision 2aking and
Co:nseling/ Feed-ack see2 to -e eq:all eIIective, next in line is E2ploee reIerral sche2e.
$tress 2anage2ent is then regarded as i2portant -:t Retire2ent plans and Work liIe -alance
s:rprisingl see2 to -e oI least eIIective.





CHAPTER-V

5.1 DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF HR MANAGERS

1. Does o:r co2pan have a clearl stated and p:-lished e2plo2ent polic?
a) Yes
-) No

Analysis:



A whooping 2ajorit oI 89 oI the 2anagers has agreed to the existence oI a clearl stated
and p:-lished e2plo2ent polic and onl 11 has denied it.










2. Does o:r co2pan co22:nicate its corporate goals to all e2ploees?
a) Yes
-) No

Analysis:


Everone (100) has agreed on co22:nicating corporate goals to all the e2ploees.
















3. Do o: co22:nicate what is expected o:t oI the e2ploee?
a) Yes
-) No

Analysis:



100 positive response has -een received when asked a-o:t whether the expectations are
co22:nicated to the e2ploees.















4. Do o: allow o:r s:-ordinates to take their own decisions?
a) Yes
-) No

Analysis:



A 2ajorit oI the sa2ple s:rveed has responded that the allow their s:-ordinates to take their
own decisions and onl 11 inIor2ed that this is not the case.















5. Is there an involve2ent oI e2ploees in their perIor2ance appraisal?
a) %otall involved
-) Partiall involved
c) Not involved

Analysis:



45 oI the 2anagers agreed in totall involving the e2ploees in the perIor2ance appraisal
process, 33 agreed on a partial participation while 22 said there is no involve2ent at all.













6. AIter appraisal do o: co22:nicate to the e2ploees the areas in which the are
lacking?
a) Yes
-) No

Analysis:



E2ploees are given Ieed-ack a-o:t their perIor2ance aIter the appraisals in view point oI 89
oI the 2anagers -:t 11 has denied an s:ch Ieed-ack sste2 in place.














7. Do o: involve the e2ploees to set their Ke PerIor2ance Areas?
a) Yes
-) No

Analysis:




A 2ajorit oI 78 oI the sa2ple has inIor2ed that the e2ploees have a sa when it co2es to
setting their ke res:lt areas and 22 has disregarded this option.












8. What are the retention tools which have gained pop:larit a2ongst the e2ploees?
Please rate the options on a scale oI 1 to 8, 1 -eing the lowest.
i) $tress Manage2ent
j) Work liIe -alance
k) Career develop2ent
l) E2ploees Participation in decision 2aking
2) Co:nseling/ Feed-ack
n) Rewards and Recognition $che2es
o) E2ploee ReIerral $che2e
p) Retire2ent Plans

Analysis:




E2ploee participation in decision 2aking to -e the 2ost pop:lar engage2ent tool a2ongst the
2anagers closel Iollowed - Rewards and recognition sche2es, next is eIIorts on Career
develo2ent. Work liIe -alance see2 to -e the next priorit, next in line is E2ploee reIerral
sche2e. $tress 2anage2ent and Co:nseling/ Feed-ack are then regarded as i2portant and
Retire2ent plans s:rprisingl see2 to -e the least eIIective.

9. Are incentives linked to achieve2ent oI individ:al goals?
a) Yes
-) No

Analysis:



78 oI the 2anagers have agreed to a close association oI incentives and individ:al goals -:t
22 has denied an s:ch association.












10. What Iactors oI the rewards sche2e contri-:te the 2ost in retaining the e2ploees?
Please rate the options on a scale oI 1 to 7, 1 -eing the lowest.

a) Co2pensation and -eneIit progra22es
-) $tock ownership and proIit sharing
c) Recognition progra22es
d) Idea collection sche2es linked to rewards Ior idea generation
e) Long service and good perIor2ance awards
I) Co2petitive co2pensation packages
g) Material -eneIits like trips, Iood and disco:nt co:pons, etc.

Analysis:




Co2pensation & BeneIit progra2s are o-served as the 2ost eIIective rewards sche2e closel
Iollowed - Co2petitive co2pensation packages. Idea collection sche2e is the next i2portant
tool and Long service & good perIor2ance awards Iollow that. Next in line is $tock ownership
& ProIit sharing. Material -eneIits and Recognition progra2s have co2e :p as the least eIIective
tools.


11. What are the activities o: cond:ct to -:ild the tea2-spirit in the organization?

a) $2all tea2 recreational activities, s:ch as cricket, trips to the cine2a
-) $ocial activities, s:ch as Ia2il gatherings
c) Co22:nit o:treach activities s:ch as vol:nteering and I:nd-raising
d) An other, please speciI

Analysis:



Onl two oI the options have received so2e response when asked a-o:t the eIIorts in the areas
oI tea2 -:ilding in the organization. Here $2all tea2 recreational activities are the 2ost
preIerred wa and so2e i2portance is given to $ocial activities in the organizations s:rveed.










12.How oIten do o: cond:ct training progra2s?


Analysis:



56 oI the organizations q:arterl cond:ct training progra2s in their organization while 22
cond:ct it 2onthl and 11 oI the sa2ple s:rveed cond:ct the training sessions as and when
req:ired. 11 oI the2 also cond:ct it earl.













13. At what level oI hierarch in the organization do o: cond:ct these training
progra22es?
a) Higher level
-) Middle level
c) Lower level
Analysis:



55 oI the organizations cond:ct training session Ior each and ever level oI the e2ploees
while 18 oI the organizations cond:ct it Ior Middle level and lower level oI the e2ploees
while 9 oI the sa2ples cond:ct it Ior Higher level onl.











14. What is the o-jective oI training the e2ploees?
a) %o enhance their c:rrent set oI skills as per the organization`s req:ire2ent
-) %o :nleash the hidden skills/ talent
c) %o :pdate the2 on the technological advance2ents
d) %o Iill the gap oI expected-act:al perIor2ance
e) All oI the a-ove
I) An other, please speciI

Analysis:



A co2-ination oI all the options has scored the highest when asked a-o:t the o-jective oI
training the e2ploees. Individ:all, enhancing the c:rrent skills as per the organization`s
req:ire2ent, :nleashing the hidden skills/ talent and :pdating the2 on the technological
advance2ent have also scored well.



15. Is there a provision oI Ilexi-ilit in ter2s oI working ho:rs? Please tick the appropriate
option.

a) Flex-ti2e
-) %eleco22:ting
c) o- $haring
d) An other

Analysis:



When q:estioned a-o:t providing Ilexi-ilit in ter2s oI working ho:rs, 2axi2:2 2anagers
agreed to provide Ilex-ti2e. %eleco22:ting, o- sharing, a co2-ination oI all these options and
an other, each has scored eq:all.









16. Do o: think the c:rrent engage2ent policies are eIIective in retaining the e2ploees in
the organization?
a) Yes
-) No

Analysis:



67 oI the 2anagers agreed that the engage2ent strategies oI their organization help in retaining
the e2ploees in the organization while 33 has disagreed on this Iact.






17. What percent-decrease range have o: o-served d:e to the eIIorts in retaining
e2ploees?

a) 1 5
-) 5 10
c) 10 & a-ove

Analysis:



HalI oI the organizations o-served 5-10 oI retention d:e to the i2ple2entation oI engage2ent
strategies in the organizations and other halI has o-served 1-5 oI retention d:e to the strategies
Iollowed.










18. In general, how do the e2ploees respond to s:ch engage2ent tools?

a) Positivel
-) Negativel
c) IndiIIerent

Analysis:



67 oI the 2anagers have o-served positive eIIect on the e2ploees oI the engage2ent
strategies while 22 said it is indiIIerent Ior the e2ploees and 11 has responded negativel.













19. Have o: co2e :p with an innovative idea Ior retaining e2ploees? Please 2ention.

Analysis: Majorit oI the sa2ple s:rve has not -een a-le to co2e :p with an oI the innovative
ideas in line with retaining e2ploees.



























CHAPTER - V
FINDINGS
1. %o engage the workIorce, 2ost oI the organization s:rveed periodical recognise
e2ploees and provides Ilexi-le working ho:rs.
2. Nowadas e2ploees are involved in decision 2aking in the organization and 2ajorit oI
the e2ploees agreed on this Iact.
3. Most oI the organizations allow their e2ploees to participate in perIor2ance appraisals
and to set their own Ke PerIor2ance Areas.
4. Co2pensation & BeneIit progra2s are o-served as the 2ost eIIective rewards sche2e
5. For tea2 -:ilding co2panies generall do s2all tea2 recreational activities and social
activities.
6. Majorit oI the sa2ple are loal towards their organization and the also reco22end
their Iriends and relatives to join the organization.
7. $tress 2anage2ent, Retire2ent plans and Work liIe -alance s:rprisingl see2 to -e oI
least eIIective engage2ent strategies according to the e2ploees.
8. Majorit oI the organizations agreed that the engage2ent strategies oI their organization
help in retaining the e2ploees in the organization.
9. Majorit has o-served 5-10 oI red:ced attrition rate d:e to the i2ple2entation oI
engage2ent strategies in the organizations.








CHAPTER- VI

6.1 RECOMMENDATIONS

1. As contrar to what 2anagers -elieve that decision 2aking is the 2ost eIIective tool, the
e2ploees still preIer rewards and recognition. %he Managers sho:ld Ioc:s on the
rewards and recognition sche2es in their organization.
2. Practicall people don`t give 2:ch i2portance to stress 2anage2ent progra2s, work liIe
-alance and retire2ent plans so there is scope oI i2prove2ent in this area.
3. %o increase e2ploee engage2ent, the organizations sho:ld :
a. Provide variet: %edio:s, repetitive tasks can ca:se -:rn o:t and -oredo2 over
ti2e. II the jo- req:ires repetitive tasks, look Ior was to introd:ce variet -
rotating d:ties, areas oI responsi-ilit, deliver oI service etc.
-. Cond:ct periodic 2eetings with e2ploees to co22:nicate good news,
challenges and eas-to-:nderstand co2pan Iinancial inIor2ation. Managers and
s:pervisors sho:ld -e co2Iorta-le co22:nicating with their staII, and a-le to
give and receive constr:ctive Ieed-ack.
c. Ind:lge in e2ploee deplo2ent iI he Ieels he is not on the right jo-. Provide an
open environ2ent.
d. Co22:nicate openl and clearl a-o:t what's expected oI e2ploees at ever
level - o:r vision, priorities, s:ccess 2eas:res, etc.
e. Get to know e2ploees' interests, goals, stressors, etc. $how an interest in their
well--eing and do what it takes ena-le the2 to Ieel 2ore I:lIilled and -etter
-alanced in work and liIe.
I. Cele-rate individ:al, tea2 and organizational s:ccesses. Catch e2ploees doing
so2ething right, and sa "%hank o:."
4. As we have got a ver good response Iro2 e2ploees so the co2panies sho:ld have the
engage2ent strategies to retain the e2ploees.

CONCLUSION

E2ploee engage2ent to re2ain a top priorit at 2an organizations and one that co2panies
increasingl view as a driver oI -:siness strateg. B:siness-critical knowledge can walk o:t the
door when an e2ploee leaves the co2pan. While e2ploee retention Iig:res have long -een
:sed - co2panies as a 2eas:re oI their perIor2ance in developing an eIIective organization,
this view oI e2ploee retention is not onl o:tdated, -:t these Iig:res 2a not -e co2prehensive
eno:gh to tr:l deter2ine the organization's eIIectiveness.
%he concept oI e2ploee retention is 2ore co2plex than si2pl eval:ating e2ploee t:rnover
Iro2 one ear to the next. %hese Iig:res oI e2ploee retention can -e so2ewhat 2isleading it
isn't necessaril the n:2-er oI e2ploees an organization loses, it's the n:2-er oI top-
perIor2ing e2ploees that leave the co2pan that sho:ld -e oI concern. For exa2ple,
2anage2ent is one oI the ke reasons e2ploees decide to sta or leave an organization. II there
is high t:rnover a2ong the 2anage2ent ranks, e2ploees 2a also Ieel :nsta-le in this ever-
changing environ2ent. Yet, on the other hand, it 2a not -e the -est -:siness strateg to retain a
2anager that is disliked - e2ploees.
%he -:siness strateg oI e2ploee retention act:all lies with e2ploee engage2ent; retention is
an o:tco2e oI engage2ent. What 2ost organizations Iail to realize is that e2ploee engage2ent
is the -iggest retention Iactor the have control over. Engaged e2ploees not onl sta longer
with the organization, the are 2ore prod:ctive, 2ore conscientio:s, 2ake Iewer errors, and take
-etter care oI c:sto2ers. %he -:siness strateg oI e2ploee retention 2:st incorporate 2ethods
that achieve a high level oI e2ploee engage2ent a2ong the organization's top perIor2ers, not
necessaril the entire workIorce.

II eIIective engage2ent practices are in place, the organizations can c:r- the growing attrition
rates especiall in I% and Banking sectors. %h:s the research st:d proves the signiIicance oI
engage2ent activities as a part oI retention strateg in an organization.






REFERENCES

http://-w.-:sinessworld.in/PDF:pload/hrspecials:rve.pdI
http://www.scri-d.co2/doc/3071101/E2ploee-Engage2ent-I2pact-on-B:siness-O:tco2es
http://Iorewordco22:nications.wordpress.co2/2008/06/17/what-is-e2ploee-engage2ent/
http://e-n.-eneIitnews.co2/asset/article/524821/staing-c:rrent/:nderstanding-e2ploee-
engage2ent-thro:gh-glo-al-lens.ht2l
http://week.2anora2aonline.co2/cgi-in/MMOnline.dll/portal/ep/theWeekContent.do?conten
t%peEDI%ORIAL&sectionNa2eCOVER20$%ORY&progra2Id1073755753&BVI
D&contentId2504208
http://www.-at.co2/jo-/career-article-1681.adp
http://www.contentwriter.in/articles/hr/e2ploee-engage2ent.ht2
http://hro2anager.co2/-log/hr-2etrics-series-i-e2ploee-engage2ent/
http://www.insightor.co2/view/503/e2ploeeengage2entr:nningonpeoplepower
http://www.thc:.ca/workplace/sat/p:-s/sat0076v102.pdI









ANNEXURE

Dear $ir/Mada2,
I, Ms. Nanc Agrawal oI IBMR-IB$,st:dent oI HRM c:rrentl :ndertaken a research project on
'E2ploee Engage2ent strategies adopted - the co2panies which is a part oI the c:rric:l:2
in partial I:lIill2ent oI 2 Degree.
I req:est o:r kind co-operation in Iilling :p the q:estionnaire and ret:rning it at the earliest.
Kindl tick the relevant -oxes and re-send the q:estionnaire aIter co2pletion.
%hanking Yo:.
Regards,
Nanc Agrawal




















"UESTIONNAIRE FOR EMPLOYEES

ORGANIZATION

NAME
DESIGNATION

EMAIL ID

Q 1.Do o: know what is expected oI o: at work?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Q 2.At work, do o: have the opport:nit to do what o: do -est ever da?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Q 3.In the last three 2onths, have o: received recognition or praise Ior doing good work?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Q 4.Is there so2eone at work who enco:rages o:r develop2ent?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le




Q 5.At work, do o:r opinions see2 to co:nt?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le
Q 6.Are o:r associates (Iellow e2ploees) co22itted to doing q:alit work?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Q 7.In the last ear, have o: had opport:nities at work to learn and grow?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Q 8.Are the pa and -eneIits in o:r organization co2para-le to si2ilar co2panies?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Q 9.Are jo- pro2otions in this organization Iair and o-jective?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Q 10.Are organization policies clearl co22:nicated in the organization?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Q 11.Do o: see o:rselI contin:ing to work Ior this organization two ears Iro2 now?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree
e) Not Applica-le

Q 12.Do o: reco22end o:r Iriends/relatives in o:r organization?
a) $trongl Agree -) Agree c) Disagree d) $trongl Disagree

e) Not Applica-le

Q13. $elect and rank the Iollowing engage2ent tools applica-le in o:r organization. Please rate
the options, Iro2 1- 8 (1 -eing the lowest and 8 -eing the highest).
a) $tress Manage2ent
-) Work liIe -alance
c) Career develop2ent
d) E2ploees Participation in decision 2aking
e) Co:nselling/ Feed-ack
I) Rewards and Recognition $che2es
g) E2ploee ReIerral $che2e
h) Retire2ent Plans






















'%HANK YOU

"UESTIONNAIRE FOR HR MANAGERS

ORGANIZATION

NAME
DESIGNATION EMAIL ID



1. Does o:r co2pan have a clearl stated and p:-lished e2plo2ent polic?
a) Yes
-) No

2. Does o:r co2pan co22:nicate its corporate goals to all e2ploees?
a) Yes
-)No

3. Do o: co22:nicate what is expected o:t oI the e2ploee?
a) Yes
-)No

4. What are the engage2ent tools which have gained pop:larit a2ongst the e2ploees? Please
rate the options on a scale oI 1 to 8, 1 -eing the lowest.
a) $tress Manage2ent
-)Work liIe -alance
c) Career develop2ent
d)E2ploees Participation in decision 2aking
e) Co:nselling/ Feed-ack
I) Rewards and Recognition $che2es
g)E2ploee ReIerral $che2e
h)Retire2ent Plans

5. Are incentives linked to achieve2ent oI individ:al goals?
a) Yes
-)No

6. What Iactors oI the rewards sche2e contri-:te the 2ost in engaging the e2ploees? Please
rate the options on a scale oI 1 to 7, 1 -eing the lowest.
a) Co2pensation and -eneIit progra22es
-)$tock ownership and proIit sharing
c) Recognition progra22es
d)Idea collection sche2es linked to rewards Ior idea generation
e) Long service and good perIor2ance awards
I) Co2petitive co2pensation packages
g)Material -eneIits like trips, Iood and disco:nt co:pons, etc.

7. What are the activities o: cond:ct to -:ild the tea2-spirit in the organisation?
a) $2all tea2 recreational activities, s:ch as cricket, trips to the cine2a
-)$ocial activities, s:ch as Ia2il gatherings
c) Co22:nit o:treach activities s:ch as vol:nteering and I:nd-raising
d)An other, please speciI

8. How oIten do o: cond:ct training progra2s?

9. At what level oI hierarch in the organization do o: cond:ct these training progra22es?
a) Higher level
-)Middle level
c) Lower level



10. What is the o-jective oI training the e2ploees?
a) %o enhance their c:rrent set oI skills as per the organization`s req:ire2ent
-)%o :nleash the hidden skills/ talent
c) %o :pdate the2 on the technological advance2ents
d)%o Iill the gap oI expected-act:al perIor2ance
e) All oI the a-ove
I) An other, please speciI

11. Is there a provision oI Ilexi-ilit in ter2s oI working ho:rs? Please tick the appropriate
option.
a) Flex-ti2e
-)%eleco22:ting
c) o- $haring
d)An other

12. Do o: think the c:rrent retention strategies are eIIective in red:cing attrition rate?
a) Yes
-)No

13. What percent-decrease range have o: o-served d:e to the eIIorts in retaining e2ploees?
a) 1 5
-)5 10
c) 10 & a-ove






14. In general, how do the e2ploees respond to s:ch engage2ent policies?
a) Positivel
-)Negativel
c) IndiIIerent

15. Have o: co2e :p with an innovative idea Ior engaging e2ploees in an organization?
Please 2ention.







'%HANK YOU