ennui
14th May 2010, 09:41
Thanks to DEFCON4 (Downunder and Godzone)
"There was a theory in some business schools that if you keep an employee under pressure that employee will be more productive.That theory fell into disrepute around ten years ago.
Some employers have not caught up with current thinking.Fear and presssure ultimately lead to employee disengagement.A high level of disengagement can actually damage a company and its brand.Qantas is a perfect example.
Engaging your employees in the business actually leadf to productivity increases at zero cost to he company
Company policy,dress codes and censorship can/and are used as threats against employees.
How much does it cost for an employer to prosecute one of its employees and what is the benefit of doing so?It adds nothing to the company's bottom line but it does send a (negative)message to the rest of the workforce.
This leads to further disengagement and loss of productivity.This does affect the company's bottom line.The whole process is self defeating.
Happy engaged employees do not generally intentionally breach company
policy.
As for the old cliche "if you dont like it leave" it is generally irrelevant.Most disengaged employees stay in the hope that they can "stick it" to management further exacerbating the problem."
What came first? QF or EK?
The 2 bucket syndrome seems to be alive and kicking in the 1st world nations also!
"There was a theory in some business schools that if you keep an employee under pressure that employee will be more productive.That theory fell into disrepute around ten years ago.
Some employers have not caught up with current thinking.Fear and presssure ultimately lead to employee disengagement.A high level of disengagement can actually damage a company and its brand.Qantas is a perfect example.
Engaging your employees in the business actually leadf to productivity increases at zero cost to he company
Company policy,dress codes and censorship can/and are used as threats against employees.
How much does it cost for an employer to prosecute one of its employees and what is the benefit of doing so?It adds nothing to the company's bottom line but it does send a (negative)message to the rest of the workforce.
This leads to further disengagement and loss of productivity.This does affect the company's bottom line.The whole process is self defeating.
Happy engaged employees do not generally intentionally breach company
policy.
As for the old cliche "if you dont like it leave" it is generally irrelevant.Most disengaged employees stay in the hope that they can "stick it" to management further exacerbating the problem."
What came first? QF or EK?
The 2 bucket syndrome seems to be alive and kicking in the 1st world nations also!