In Pursuit of Profession: Satisfaction vs engagement

What do the Rolling Stones, Otis Redding, Devo and Britney Spears all have in common? They’ve all sung about satisfaction. But not one of them has ever sung about engagement.

But why?

Simple. Satisfaction is a feeling (and most, if not all, songs are about feelings); engagement is an action. When I think of satisfaction, I picture reaching a certain level in life that I can live with, whether it’s by my efforts or that I’m simply there as part of a group – a rising tide lifting all boats. Engagement on the other hand means I’m an active participant. My heart and mind is in it. I’m doing something to affect my destiny.

To get a better feel for the difference between satisfaction and engagement, I talked to Tracy Maylett, Ed.D, CEO of DecisionWise. DecisionWise helps people work better together by turning individual and organizational feedback into results. The company made the Inc. 5000 list of fastest growing private companies in America for the second year in a row this year. Maylett also co-authored the book MAGIC: Five Keys to Unlock the Power of Employee Engagement and he’s releasing a follow up to that book entitled The Employee Experience: How to attract talent, retain top performers, and drive results in January 2017.

Mark Fadden (MF): “Why is it so important to have engaged employees rather than satisfied employees?”

Tracy Maylett (TM): “Engagement is an emotional state where we feel passionate, energetic, and committed to our work. In turn, we fully invest our best selves—our hearts, spirits, minds, and hands—in the work we do. Engagement is a two-part process, involving both feeling and doing. Satisfaction, on the other hand, takes into account only one of those parts; the feeling portion. It’s fully possible that an employee could be satisfied with his or her job, yet not change behavior because of it. We see many examples of workplaces where employees are content, happy, and satisfied, yet they don’t act differently because of it. Rather than satisfied employees, we want employees who both feel and act.”

MF: “Is it all about the bottom line? Or are there other workplace issues to think about in terms of satisfaction versus engagement?”

TM: “It’s not all about the bottom line. It’s also about ethics and humanity. Although engaged organizations have been shown through multiple studies to be more profitable than disengaged organizations, we have to consider the fact that employees spend more than half of their waking hours in the workplace. While an employer receives the benefit of productivity and profitability, engaged cultures also facilitate engaged lives outside of the workplace. When I have a bad day at work, watch out family! The opposite occurs when I love my job. When I’m in a job I love—one in which I can truly engage—it spills over to the other rolls in my life.”

MF: “Do satisfaction and engagement go hand in hand? In other words, do your employees need to be satisfied before they can be engaged?”

TM: “Elements of satisfaction are referred to in Organizational Psychology as “Hygiene Factors.” These are elements that, when missing, create dissatisfaction, but the presence of these (or increase of these) elements do not create engagement. Examples may be compensation, safety, or having the tools to do your job. These do not necessarily create motivation or engagement. However, the lack of these hygiene factors (I’m not paid what I think I’m worth, I don’t feel safe, my laptop is 8 years old, etc.) create clear disengagement. Satisfaction is about hygiene factors—they must be in place in order for me to be willing to do my job. But they’re not engagement. Satisfaction is the base for engagement, but doesn’t create engagement.”

MF: “Is it all up to employers to solve the engagement vs. satisfaction issue? Or does the employee bear some of the burden?”

TM: “The primary responsibility for satisfaction is on the shoulders of the employer. As an employer, I must ensure that the satisfaction elements are all in place. With engagement, however, it’s a 50/50 proposition. My role as an employer is to create an environment in which employees can choose to be engaged. However, it’s up to the employee to make that choice.”

MF: “What are some ways that both employees and employers can successfully make the switch from having or being satisfied employees to having or being engaged employees?”

TM: “Through over 14 million survey responses, we discovered that there are five keys to engagement. They follow the acronym “MAGIC”—Meaning, Autonomy, Growth, Impact, and Connection. In order to move from satisfaction to engagement, we have to think beyond hygiene factors and start thinking MAGIC. The more these five elements are present, the more likely an employee is to choose to engage.”

MF: “When trying to make employees more engaged, it seems that there is a slippery slope to success with many pitfalls along the way. Can you discuss a few things employers should never do when trying to get their employees more engaged?”

TM: “Many organizations today try to “perk” their way to engagement. Sure, it’s cool to have a foosball table in the breakroom, Taco Tuesdays, and free run of the office soda machine. But these things only build on satisfaction—they don’t create engagement. In fact, while these perks may have a short-term impact on satisfaction, they don’t last long. This factor is known as the “adaptation principal.” We quickly adapt to these perks, and want more. While I may be excited for Taco Tuesday, after a few Tuesdays I’m thinking “Hmmm… my company should also offer Fajita Fridays.” Engagement, on the other hand, isn’t about perks, it’s about creating the environment in which employees experience MAGIC.”

MF: “How important is it to manage an employee’s expectations in terms of engagement?”

TM: “In our follow-up studies to [the book] MAGIC, we learned that one of the greatest contributors (as well as detractors) to engagement is, what we refer to as “Expectation Alignment.” We have found that single-most powerful influence in engagement is whether an employee’s expectations are aligned with those of his or her work environment. Some cultures and working conditions are brutal, yet employees clearly find MAGIC in what they do. This is the reason doctors in Africa can live in the desert for months, in the poorest of conditions, yet still be fully engaged in their work. Their expectations are fully aligned with their experience. Yet, on the other hand, other employees work less than 40 hours per week, drop off their laundry at the reception desk, head to the breakroom for a latte, and complain about “poor working conditions” the entire day. When expectations are aligned, we create the environment in which engagement can occur. When they’re not aligned, our entire focus is on a transactional (this-for-that) relationship. It’s about setting mutual expectations and aligning those expectations to the employee experience.”

This story was originally published December 2, 2016 at 5:17 PM with the headline "In Pursuit of Profession: Satisfaction vs engagement."