Comments on: Engagement or Performance: What Comes First?

By: Mark Howell

Mark Howell — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 20:02:10 +0000

Yes! That’s exactly right! It is Engagement>Performance>Results/Success. Great observation. Thanks Tim!
mark

By: Tim Wright

Tim Wright — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 18:14:42 +0000

In full agreement!
I even extend the integration to look and feel like this:
Engagement > Performance > Results/Success.
Tim

By: Mark Howell

Mark Howell — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 14:35:46 +0000

Thanks for the insight Mike! You’re dead on.
It is tough, isn’t it? The commitment to the things that produce engagement takes precious time and energy. Tough to re-allocate when the chips are down. Better to allocate in advance.
mark

By: Mike Chitty

Mike Chitty — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:27:12 +0000

Although it is a little ‘chicken and egg’ I firmly believe that engagement is the precursor to sustained high performance. The unfortunate thing is that so many struggling firms think that the solution is to work harder – rather than creating some slack time, increasing engagement, and wathcing things turn around.
However I have seen this happen again and again, while I have rarely (NEVER) seen an organisation find success through simply working harder.