I wonder if, in your experience, you see any correlation between those who remain unpersuaded and the predominance of certain leadership styles and/or approaches to corporate strategy.

As per my previous post, perhaps it’s only those who subscribe to the “inside out” view of strategy development who intuitively understand the power of engagement.

As for those who practice authoritative (“command and control”) or pace-setting leadership styles, maybe the very concept of engagement or involvement is anathema to them.

Possession of the term must be nine parts of the law.

Your point is of course the right one – I like to see it ultimately as “contribution” (value creation) to both the business (commercial and cultural) and the employee (personal and professional).

I’m getting tired of the same old arguments … those shrouded figures we call management said we needed to prove our business case, so we spent the 90s and early 2000s doing that (thanks Gallup, ISR, TP, WW et al) – and now that we have the proof, there’s always another reason not to invest in it.

On the other hand, it must be said many leading organisations are in fact getting better at it. But each new generation seems to need to be converted all over again…