It's impossible to count the number of times I hear people talk about the importance of "employee engagement" at seminars, luncheons, conferences, etc. We talk about ways to improve it, measure it, sell it internally, and implement it.
But…wait a minute! Let's stop here: we never talk about why having highly engaged people doesn't seem to be important to some managers. 
Don't get me wrong: they probably claim that everything said on the subject is correct. They even firmly believe it. And they undoubtedly love to talk about it, especially with newcomers.
But there always comes a time to act. Whether it's necessary to develop or remove a manager who shouldn't be in that position, manage compensation, or change cultural mechanisms that destroy engagement. And that's where resistance appears. It's not explicit, but it's worth considering the reasons behind it.
1. “The company is not ready.”
It's almost funny that the very reason we should work on engagement is the one used as an excuse to defend ourselves from not doing so. And the truth is that implementing any improvement related to this issue without management involvement is destined to fail.
2. Jobs that do not generate commitment.
If we were working in a technology company, engaging people is fairly simple. But there are a huge number of roles whose characteristics aren't necessarily motivating. Is it worthwhile, then, to consider generating engagement in jobs that are physically and/or mentally exhausting? Wouldn't it be better to think about processes that alleviate that stress and prevent mistakes from happening?
3. There is no return on that investment
If we're not able to concretely answer the hard costs and expected benefits of improving engagement, and if we only talk about softer issues, it's better to forget about it.
4. Phew! Another “sentimental” HR initiative…
Yes. The truth is, we can sometimes sound a little naive. Because if the job description of the person in question says, for example, "keeping the sewers unclogged," there's little we can do to encourage their enthusiasm. It's better to think about a bonus and a good pat on the back thanking them for their role.
5. Involvement is not a reality, a goal.
If we want a person committed to their work, there's no training for that. It has more to do with selection, department leadership, and creating an environment that at least doesn't generate obstacles and disappointment.
To be honest, a significant amount of communication, transparency, and performance management (not just the "mandatory evaluation once a year" kind) are valuable tools when working with engagement.
And in the long term, we must stop hiding our heads from all those sources of discontent that we know exist but are difficult to address: compensation, internal politics, and poor leadership.
Will it be possible?
