In this podcast episode, the author presents an article originally published in the Jamaica Gleaner that reframes employee engagement from a vague, innate belief to a set of observable, measurable behaviors. The piece argues that treating engagement as a "video‑tape test"—behaviors that can be captured on camera—allows managers to identify, assess, and improve engagement systematically. It outlines a six‑step process: (1) group jobs by engaged behaviors and adjust job descriptions; (2) define low‑engagement behaviors in concrete, observable terms; (3) similarly break down high‑engagement behaviors; (4) map intermediate behaviors onto a ladder and create a self‑assessment tool; (5) teach employees to self‑rate conservatively, giving them a clear yardstick for improvement; and (6) provide coaching and structured improvement plans. By turning these steps into a game‑like framework, managers give employees a clear path to higher engagement, benefiting both the individual and the organization.
Chapters
Hello and welcome back to the Chronicles from a Caribbean Cubicle podcast. Here's an article I wrote for the Jamaica Gleaner. It's entitled "How to Gamify Employee Engagement." For most companies, employee engagement is just like a religious belief. Someone either has it or doesn't. This separation between those who are blessed or cursed is familiar to any churchgoer, but does it have a place in corporate Jamaica? There may be a better way, starting with a key assumption. Many managers assume that high performance is an innate characteristic. Is so dem stay? is a retort that ends arguments. In their minds, it's due to personality, culture, upbringing, ethnicity, or some other intangible factor which can't be changed. They pass a final judgment that throws an employee with all his potential into a box, which is then locked from the outside. Following this logic, the only resolution is to hire engaged employees from the start. However, that not only takes a long time, it hardly lasts. Why? The vast majority of new hires are honestly engaged for their first 3 to 6 months, after which they slip into the same disaffection that afflicts their colleagues. After a while, they are as ordinary as everyone else. A more fruitful approach throws out the old concept of engagement as a belief, replacing it with a higher standard. Let's narrow it down to a collection of observable behaviors which can be captured on a video camera. Therefore passing what I call the "video tape test." Using this standard, we can focus on the precise habits, practices, and actions people take when they are engaged or not. However, we must be careful. My work in the region shows that engaged behaviors vary widely between companies, and sometimes even between working groups. There are no cookie-cutter, universal answers. This challenge means that you as a manager need to do some legwork in order to help your employees. Follow these steps: Step 1: Group your employees' jobs. Examine the positions report to you and group them by the behaviors demonstrated to be engaged. In some rare cases, you may find that someone's formal job description may be too narrowly defined. For example, their role in building positive relationships around them using engaged behaviors may be diminished. In these cases, redraft the job description to be more realistic and holistic. Step 2: Distinguish low engagement. Set aside hostile behaviors which are clearly antagonistic or simply a demonstration of bad mind. Then, define the level of low performance which is just enough to prevent someone from being fired, but not enough for them to contribute more than a minimum. Start to detail the behavior of this person. Which practices do they engage in each day? Which ones are they unlikely to initiate? Break down complex behaviors into small, practical atoms which are easy to observe. For example, being a standoff is not a detailed behavior. However, skipping the Christmas party, refusing lunch meetings, and leaving at 4:30 on the dot every evening might be. Step 3: Clarify high engagement. Perform a similar teardown of high engagement. Step 4: Identify interim behaviors. Between the two extremes, distinguish additional levels an employee would climb on his or her way to high engagement. Think of it as a ladder. Then, turn these steps into an assessment for employees to apply for themselves. Step 5: Teach employees to self-assess. As employees evaluate themselves, show them the benefit of conservative grading, which allows for room to improve. Serious employees will be glad for the opportunity to improve, now that they have a clear yardstick and direction. Step 6: Offer coaching. Ask employees to take the initiative to improve performance. Most should be able to put together long-term improvement plans, but they will need your help to craft plans which aren't too aggressive. These skills always appear easier to implement than they are. In fact, employees require a great deal of support to achieve their goals. You may not be the one to provide it, but you should help assemble a framework that makes it easy to make stepwise improvements. If you suspect that this sounds a bit like self-gamification, you're correct. As the manager, you are actually providing a clear-cut game your employees can play to become more engaged, one step at a time. In summary, it provides a huge win for both parties. Employees' attention will be diverted towards the task of giving themselves the gift of focused energy, a life engaged in purposeful activity even at their workplace. The problem your company faces is that employees who are bored and disengaged are comparing their work life with other parts of their lives. The only way for it to measure up is for you, the manager, to play your part in helping them adopt a game they can win.
