Dr. Craig Pinder’s recognition as a Fellow CHRP is just the most recent in a distinguished career: a lifetime’s record of devotion to learning, the betterment of business, and people practices in particular. As an academic, his impact at the University of Victoria’s Faculty of Business, recently renamed the Peter B. Gusatvson School of Business, is renowned amongst students and peers alike. In 2005, he was granted the singular honour of being named “Distinguished Professor of Organizational Behaviour” for his academic excellence and contributions to the greater university community alike. Among his many research accomplishments are three books on work motivation, the latest being “Work Motivation in Organizational Behaviour”. (Pyschology Press, 2008)

How does ‘employee engagement’ in the modern context differ from the ‘workplace motivation’?
I’m skeptical. You are speaking to a conservative who has blown whistles at false notions for many years. I view employee engagement from a long historic perspective as the brand of the decade and ask, “What’s inside?” Old things mixed in different ways depending on what is selling and what consulting agencies favour.

I see it as a soup of older concepts that have to do with varying forms of attachment of people to their work and their employer – emotionally, psychically, even spiritually.  Different gurus seem to throw different ingredients into the soup.

I have always looked at this concept as a synthesis: an amalgam of different concepts, all pretty much advocated by management.  Management is too often a matter of the fashion of the decade. Management by objectives. Management by walking around. ‘Engagement’ has been the fashion of the past decade. It is old wine in new bottles.

The unions have been slow to promote the ‘feel good’ side of things until physical working conditions are satisfactory and safe and compensation is adequate.

Let me share an insight. I believe that, going back to the late 60s when I began studying this as an undergrad, employees are willing to grant only so many social credits to management to try new-fangled techniques. Think of it as a currency. Think of it as credibility. You have only so much of it.

It really needs to be adopted and embraced by managers as part of their jobs, not something to be done off the side of the desk, but as an integral part of the job. If it is thought of as a fad, it will be treated as such, and there go more social credits.

What role does HR play in fostering engagement? Where does it begin? What area has the most potential for impact?
It is believed that low levels of ‘engagement’ are going to be associated with things that management does not like: turnover, absenteeism, sabotage, or more extremely, violence, drug and alcohol abuse, harassment.

You have got to keep your powder dry on these things and they must be really well thought out, well-funded and have a genuine intention for the welfare of everyone involved. If it is treated as a quick fix, bandage or panacea, you’re going to lose at lot of credit with your employees – credit not available the next time around.

I think that most of the engagement that is possible in a workplace may originate with any central HR authority, but the real action is on the shop or office floor.

Capital HR implies a central HR authority. Unless the policies that emerge from the excitement are practiced on the floor every day by line managers, they are doomed to fail. That’s why so many of the management programs I have studied have failed because there is short-term excitement in the core, but not practiced by stressed out line management.

It’s fine for a bunch of HR specialists to sit and read the latest Harvard Business Review and then promulgate blofty sounding principles, but if its not embraced and practiced on a day-by-day basis on the floor, you’re wasting time and money and just making people angry.

What is the best way of making engagement ‘real’ for executive leadership teams?
This is not a prepared list, but here goes. One, it must be realistically presented. So many programs are sold as silver bullets. I’ve been here a long time and I have never seen a silver bullet. The degree to which it is a legitimate program for an organization must be honestly addressed. Broken expectations are the greatest detriment to these types of programs.

Two, these programs all have to be funded with cash, management time and participation by the grass roots, an ‘all in this together’ approach with realistic expectations. There can be no secrets and there needs to be a way of agreeing ahead of time whether the program is working or not. If there is a union involved they must be involved in planning and executing the program.

Benchmarking is relatively simple. Basic research models are available that target different areas you want to see change in. Genuine endorsement and continued monitoring is key to determining success.  You need to give it time, a chance for people in the culture to see the company is serious about the purpose of the program.  Have the numbers and results to report back, then turn it back to the masses.

If there is good news you share it: the same with bad news. People need to know their participation is real. Phony participation is a poison pill for any organization.

(PeopleTalk: Fall 2012)