The Macleod Review on Employee Engagement

Summary: Filed under 'Recycled Rubbish'.

I'm not sure how many carbon credits were used up in its manufacture.

Having just read the 157 page report, I seem to find the same old people spouting the same old questionable rubbish and what can be described as a hodge-podge of undefined criteria of research and case studies, which unfortunately is not unusual. It's also full of the usual suspects.

We decided against contributing to this report fearing that it would be yet another 'Kingsmill' - which is a term now used in HR denoting a report that uses up vast energy and resources but goes nowhere in its findings.

In fact on reading the report its difficult to actually get to grips with what it was trying to achieve save for some PR (particularly for some struggling-for -business practitioners).

As usual, in the time taken, we're utilising all of our resources in helping clients with our expertise in developing and implementing a measured strategy on the practicalities of employee/staff engagement.

We're currently compiling our own report which will be due for publication shortly but will be free of meaningless statistical claims, dodgy research and woolly academic thinking. It will also ask some hard questions regarding some common references used.

I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one with a similar opinion.....see Personnel Today 'MacLeod Review struggles to engage senior HR professionals' for example and a good comment by Mike Berry also.

I wouldn't get over-excited by the MacLeod Review purely given its politically motivated raison d'etre.

For those organisations who are already on the 'employee engagement case' - keep going. If you want to learn how to take it to the next level or indeed how to unlearn some questionable common practice give us a call..........