Dub Dubs writes a follow up to his analysis of Northwetern University study from earlier in the month. Where he was struggling with the differences between engagement and commitment, like many people.
In his recent post Dubs is saying you cannot have engagement without commitment and just because you have commitment does not mean you have engagement. To this fact I would agree completely. Lets look at this a bit further.
The whole conversation that has been going on around engagement over the last couple of months is really good as we are working through the different aspects of engagement within the workplace. (I was going to post a link to a Technorati search but there seems to be a large amount of spam on the subject from Blogger which makes the search useless)This is obviously a good thing as the current trends in the recruitment marketplace are indicating that skilled employees are getting harder and harder to find. As such it is far cheaper to keep the people you already have. This means that engaged and satisfied employees are less likely to leave, saving you money!
There have been lots of studies on the cost of hiring therefore every employee you have that is engaged and satisfied adds to the cost avoidance line in your business case for retention programs.