Organisational Sustainability in Multicultural Environments: Creating a Culture of Engagement

1. Organisational sustainability in multicultural environments through the creation of a culture of engagement Dr Rica Viljoen

2. Rica Viljoen • Doctor in Business Leadership (SBL Unisa) • International Organisational Development specialist and practitioner focusing on optimising individual, group and organisational behaviour • Focus on creating Engagement in multi-cultural organisations through Inclusivity • Consulted to and facilitated in various countries e.g. California, Chicago, Peru, Australia, Spain, Zambia, Mali, Tanzania, Namibia, Zambia, Ghana • Associated with numerous academic institutions as subject matter expert e.g. da Vinci Institute, University of Johannesburg, SBL – UNISA and Village of Leaders – Stellenbosch • Managing Director of Mandala Consulting

3. Layout of presentation Organisational sustainability in multicultural environments through the creation of a culture of engagement • Topic Description • Academic foundation • Engagement • Creating climate of engagement • Unleashing tacit potential in systems • Benchmark of Engagement (BeQ) • Case study: Ghana, Australia • Benefits of Engagement • Methodologies that release Engagement • Further development of BeQ • Conclusions • Questions

4. Topic Description In today’s competitive, ever changing world, companies strive harder than ever to implement strategy in a sustainable manner and to stay recent in the mind of the global consumer. The people capacity in the system and the interaction between human entities lead to the “amount of energy” in a system to perform. This can lead to a climate of engagement – a system where the tacit potential of an individual manifest and is applied to organisational tasks to the benefit of the individual, the group and the organisation. . Other forms of energy is “apathetic” or “disconnected” with obvious human potential losses. Engagement lead to organisational benefits such as customer centricity, productivity, safe behaviour, low turnover and low absenteeism.

5. Academic Foundation Introduction Research Design Data Gathering 1.1 Existing Theory 1.2 Case Study 1.3 In depth interviews 1.4 Focus groups Data analysis through Qualitative Methodologies 2.1 Grounded Theory 2.2 Post intervention investigation 2.4 Content Analysis 2.3 Phenomenology Results of qualitative research process Inclusivity Framework Testing Phase Research Questions Adapted Inclusivity Framework Limitations of study Identification of Future research Conclusions and recommendations

6. Within the context of the industry and the country: Assumptions About Me Respect, Regard, Resilience, Personal Responsibility The Individual Assumptions About We Support, Leadership, Diversity, Accountability The Team Assumptions About They Trust, Alignment, Adaptability to change, Inclusivity, Ethics The organisation Non-negotiable pre-requisites for Engagement L E A D E R S H I P

7. Internationally Benchmarked • The BeQ-model reflects the interplay between assumptions and perceptions alive and well in organisations around constructs that contribute to the unleashing of individual voices, potential and gifts. • As the industry dynamics, the country climate and worldview also influence these perceptions, they are also explored. Engagement > 75% Involved 60-74% Results of quantitative research process Apathetic 45-59% Disconnected <45%% Energy is positive, neutral or negative

8. Engagement Employee Engagement is defined (Corporate Leadership Council, 2004:3) as the “positive emotional connection to an employee’s work, thus affective, normative and continuance commitment” and "a heightened emotional connection that an employee feels for his or her organisation, that influences him or her to exert greater discretionary effort to his or her work".

9. Engagement Engagement through Inclusivity “…a radical organizational transformational methodology which aligns the doing and the being side of the organization around commonly defined principles and values, co-created by all. It is a systemic approach that focuses on underlying beliefs and assumptions and challenges patterns in the individual, group and organisational psyche, to spend energy and engage in a sustainable, inclusive manner with the purpose to achieve shared consciousness.”

10. Engagement Viljoen (2008) defined a culture of Engagement as “the way in which adult members of a system interact around the Doing and the Being to unleash potential. Engagement is viewed as the output of the energy in the system to perform” The level of Engagement is determined by the systemic result of the interplay between the individual potential, group potential and organisational potential in the context of the specific industry or national culture”. The I-engage define behavioural engagement as defined by Massey (2008)

11. Engagement The level of Engagement is determined by the systemic result of the interplay between the individual potential, group potential and organisational potential in the context of the specific industry or national culture”. The I-engage define behavioural engagement as defined by Massey (2008)

12. A culture of Engagement- energy on all dimensions Individual OD Interventions EQ Journey State Engagement Trait Engagement Behavioral Engagement Group Dialoguing Leadership Work attributes Appreciative Inquiry Storytelling Organisational Leadership Culture of Engagement World Cafe Organisation The What Engagement / Commitment Doing Context: Industry South Africa Africa Global The Individual Leadership How individuals change Apathy Inclusivity The Team The Organisation Being Disconnect How groups change How organisations change The way: How we change Why we change Essence of Change We change differently New world of work New Sciences Consciousness On Diversity Mandala Consulting Nature of the world

13. Level of Engagement National Cultural Assumptions About Me The individual Assumptions About We Level of engagement The Team The Organisation Assumptions About They and Society Context

14. Business Benefits of a Culture of Engagement Level of engagement Correlates directly to: + - Productivity Abseetism Retention Turnover Employee Satisfaction Apathy Creativity and Innovation Number of incidents Safe Behaviour Number of Accidents Exceptional Service Mistakes Ability to deal with change Apathy Superior Quality

15. Benefits of Engagement Inclusivity has benefits on all the different domains: • Individual domain: Personal growth, enhanced EQ, Personal effectiveness Higher levels of Consciousness Allowing of differences, Hope, Pride. • Group domain: Enhanced group dynamics, Less unconscious group dynamics, Innovation, Creativity. • Organisational domain: Trust, Conducive climate and growth, Sense of Belonging, Commitment, Retention of Talent • Societal context: Community Building, localization of Skill , Reputable Employer Energy to perform

16. Quote “We are all connected and operate within living fields of thought and perception. The world is not fixed but in constant flux; accordingly, the future is not fixed, and so can be shaped Humans possess significant tacit knowledge – we know more than we can say The question to be resolved : how to remove the blocks and tap into that knowledge in order to create the kind of future we all want?” David Bohm

17. Optimal people job fit EngagementTransformational Process The DOINGStep 1: Analysis OD interventions The DOINGStep 2: Planning Core values Structure Core capabilities The BEING Step 1: Ensure talent Core purpose Scenario planning Mission External Value Prop Internal Branding Strategic architecture The articulated and clearly understood concept of the desired future state PESTLE Vision Leadership Framework PORTER Sustainable Transformation SWOT Profit modeling Strategy operationalised Insight Engagement Leadership formulates strategy Balanced Score Card and Values Understanding differences Strategic Goals Alignment, Shared understanding Strategic Initiatives Strategy translation into Operational terms Change resilience Leadership alignment Shared views of the present and the future Leadership Drives and implement strategy Operational goals Targets Group and Individual BSC Renewed capacity to perform The BEINGStep 3: Translation Values Measures KPA’s The DOINGand BEING Final Step: Cementing Behaviours IDP The DOINGStep 3: Translation The BEING Step 2: Inclusion

18. Damang Case study

19. SANKOFA Ghana Case Study Supervisor ‘s Motivation and Leadership Sense of Urgency High Alignment Focus of BeQ High Risk Taking Low Belonging Safety Focus Low Acknowledgement Mpira mo ho Paralyzed Inconsistent Perf management Pride Low Confidence Decreased Performance Commitment Language Diversity Have voice Unwillingness to Engage Low Wellbeing Capability Focus of BeQ Evident Enablers Outcome Compromisers Manifested Dynamic

20. Ghana: Drivers of I_Engage

21. Different Value Systems Engage Differently

22. I-Engage formula: Ghana I_ENGAGEMENT = .16*SUPERVISOR_CAPABILITY + .123*TRUST+ .1055EXPAT_LOCAL I-Engagement Quotient different for each different environment

23. I-Engage formula: Australia I_ENGAGE = .125*ENABLED + .103*INCLUSION+ .153*CORPOR_CITIZEN +.089*SUPPORT+ .078*DIVERSITY + 1.405 I-Engagement Quotient different for each different environment

24. I-Engage formula: South Africa I_ENGAGE = .12*DIRECT LINE MANAGER_CAPABILITY + .1123*RESPECT+ .1032DIVERSITY_ACCEPTANCE +.800FEELING_REWARDED I-Engagement Quotient different for each different environment

25. Hofstede National Cultural Dynamics

26. Hofstede National Cultural Dynamics

27. Conclusion Mind the gap!!!!

28. Meta-insights gained on Engagement • The DOING and BEING are equally important and should be dealt with as such. • Building a culture of Engagement is a Radical Transformational Strategy. • Hope is created during this strategy – this energy, if not channeled can have negative implications. • Transformational leadership is needed to sponsor the process. • Leadership strength and ethics on all organizational levels are critical. • Emotional intelligence development critical in order to deal with mature system dynamics. • Each action has a reaction – creating an inclusive system will lead to exclusion of other systems.

29. Quote “It’s not that we need to form new organisations. It’s simply that we have to awaken to new ways of thinking. I believe it makes no sense to spend a lot of time attacking the current realities. It is time to create the new models that have in them the complexity that makes the older systems obsolete. And to the extent that we can do that, and do that quickly, I think we can provide what will be necessary for a major breakthrough for the future.”  ~ Dr. Don Beck

30. Questions ?

31. References Agarwala, T. 2003, ‘Innovative human resource practices and organisational commitment: An empirical investigation’, International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 175-197. Allen, N.J. & Meyer, J.P. 1990, ‘The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organisation’, Journal of Occupational Psychology, vol. 63, pp. 1-18. Angle, H.L. & Perry, J.L. 1986, ‘Dual commitment and labour- management relationship climates‘, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 31-50. Angle, H.L. & Perry, J.L. 1983, ‘Organisational commitment: Individual and organisational influences‘, Work and Occupations, vol. 10, no.2, pp. 123-146. Baruch, Y. & Winkelmann-Gleed, A. 2002, ‘Multiple commitments: A conceptual framework and empirical investigation on a Community Health Service Trust‘, British Journal of Management, vol. 13, pp. 337-357. Benson, J. 1998, ‘Dual commitment: Contract workers in Australian manufacturing enterprises’, Journal of Management Studies, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 355-375. Bishop, J.W. Dow Scott, K. & Burroughs, S.M. 2000, ‘Support, commitment, and employee outcomes in a team environment’, Journal of Management, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 1113-1132. Blau, P.M. 1964, Exchange and Power in Social Life, Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, New York.

32. References Chang, K. & Chelladurai, P. 2003, ‘Comparison of Part-time workers and Full-time workers: Commitment and citizenship behaviours in Korean sport organisations’, Journal of Sport Management, vol. 17, pp. 394-416. Crabtree, S. 2005, ‘Engagement keeps the doctor away‘, Gallup Management Journal, January 13, pp. 1-4. Deery, S.J. & Iverson, R.D. 1998, ‘Antecedents and consequences of dual and unilateral commitment: A longitudinal study‘, The University of Melbourne, Department of Management working paper number 1, January 1998. Echols, M.E. 2005, ‘Engaging employees to impact performance‘ Chief Learning Officer, February, pp. 44-48. Eisenberger, R. Fasolo, P & Davis-LaMastro, V. 1990, ‘Perceived organisational support and employee diligence, commitment and innovation‘, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 75, no. 1, pp. 51-59. Eisenberger, R. Huntington. R. Hutchinson, S. & Sowa, D. 1986, ‘Perceived organisational support‘, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 500-507. Gouldner, A.W. 1960, ‘The norm of reciprocity. American Sociological Review, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 165-178. Greenfield. W.M. 2004, ‘Decision making and employee engagement‘, Employee Relations Today‘, Summer, pp. 13-24. Gubman, E. 2004, ‘From engagement to passion for work: The search for the missing person‘, Human Research Planning, pp. 42-46.

33. References Harter, J.K. Schmidt, F.L. & Hayes, T.L. 2002, ‘Business- unit- level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta analysis‘, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 87, no. 2, pp. 268-279. Kahn, W.A. 1990, ‘Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work‘, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 692-724. Luthans, F. & Peterson, S.J. 2002, ‘Employee engagement and manager self-efficacy: Implications for managerial effectiveness and development‘, Journal of Management Development, vol. 21, 5, pp. 376-387. May, D.R. Gilson, R.L. & Harter, L.M. 2004, ‘The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work’, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, vol. 77, PP. 11-37. Macey, W.H. & Schneider, B. 2008. ‘The meaning of employee engagement’ , Industrial and Organisational Psychology, vol, 1, pp 3-30. McDade, S. & McKenzie, A. 2002, ‘Knowledge workers in the engagement equation’, Strategic HR Review, vol. 1, 4, pp. 34-37. Meyer, J.P. & Allen, N.J. 1991, ‘A three component conceptualisation of organisational commitment’, Human Resource Management Review, vol. 1, pp. 61-89.

34. References Mowday, R.T. Steers, R.M. & Porter, L.W. 1979, ‘The measurement of organizational commitment, Journal of Vocational Behaviour, vol. 14, pp. 224-247. Mueller, C.W. Wallace, J.E. & Price, J.L. 1992, ‘Employee commitment: Resolving some issues‘, Work and Occupations, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 211-236. Porter, L.W. Steers, R.M., Mowday, R.T. & Boulian, P.V. 1974, ‘Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians’, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 603-609. Price, J.L. & Mueller, C.W. 1986, Handbook of organizational measurement, Pitman Publishing, INC, Massachusetts. Price, J.L. & Mueller, C.W. 1981, ‘A causal model of turnover for nurses‘, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 543-565. Robinson, D., Perryman, S. & Hayday, S. 2004, ‘The drivers of employee engagement‘, Institute of Employment Studies, Report 405. Viljoen, R.C. 2008, ‘Sustainable organisational transformation through inclusivity’, DBL dissertation. Available online www://etd.unisa.ac.za/ETD-db/theses/available/etd-02192009-090759/unrestricted/00thesis.pdf