lOMoARcPSD|9443058

HBR Notes - Helpful

Organizational Behaviour (McMaster University)

StuDocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university

Downloaded by Tanisa Bakht (tanisa277@gmail.com)
 lOMoARcPSD|9443058

ANYONE WHO WANTS TO USE THIS DURING MIDTERM: Please make

a copy of this document to keep in your own google drive to prevent traffic
slowing down this page :) real talk!
Table of Contents
Please put your name below the HBR article (which are the PDFs found on Avenue under each
week’s section) that you want to take notes for so that we can keep track of who’s doing what
Make sure to include key terms in your notes so that others can easily ctrl+f this
document

1 - HBR Lives Where Taylorism Died

Avery B (Mac)
1 - The Management Century
Avery B (Mac)
1 - Beyond Theory Y
Saadia
2 - Boost Your Emotional Intelligence with These 3 Questions
Charles
2 - Great Teams Are About Personalities, Not Just Skill
Saadias
3 - How to Take the Bias Out of Interviews
Shrek/Cactus
3 - To Reduce Gender Bias, Anonymize Job Applications
Saadia
4 - 4 Reasons Good Employees Lose Their Motivation
Shakir/Paula
4 - What Maslow's Hierarchy Won't Tell You About Motivation
Shakir/Paula
5a - Root Out Bias from Your Decision Making Process
Laura
5a - The Future of Decision-Making, Less Intuition, More Evidence
Charles
5b - Figure Out Your Manager's Communication Style
Gray
5b - Nonverbal Cues Get Employees to Open Up - or Shut Down
Gray

Downloaded by Tanisa Bakht (tanisa277@gmail.com)

1 - HBR Lives Where Taylorism Died
- Frederick Taylor (“the father of scientific management”) had direct influence upon the
Watertown Arsenal in 1908 when working with William Crozier to fight high labor costs and
unions
- Changes included streamlining material flow and replacing machinery
- Taylor’s team studied the arsenal’s workers, low skill workers did not mind but molders
resented it (first rebellion against Taylorism; only lasted a week)
- Taylorism was criticized for its ‘dehumanizing effect on workers - for treating them as
automatons whose movements must be preordained by a higher intelligence’
- Time studies ended but Taylor’s ideas remained and the factory became a role model for the Army

I can’t lie this one is very short

1 - The Management Century
- Chicago, May 1886 - Henry R. Towne writes “The Engineer as an Economist”
- Argued that good engineers do not necessarily equal good businessmen
- Three eras of management; Aspiration (1880s-1940s), Good feelings (1940s-1980s) and
Specialization (1980s-present)
- Era of Specialization marked as both a retreat and as an era of global triumph
- Taylor’s beliefs: “The laborer should work according to a process analyzed and
designed by management for optimum efficiency, ‘the one best way,’ allowing
him to do as much as humanly possible within a specific time period”
- Main goal was to use scientific learnings and apply them to business management
- Hawthorne studies proved that attention from management improved productivity
- Peter Drucker believed in corporations becoming more social and interactive
- Fritz Roethlisberger referred to organizations as “social systems” and stated
management’s job was to maintain their equilibrium (win/win)
- Drucker argued that management is not passive, managers must take charge
- Drucker published Managing For Results in 1964, and proposed that managers should scan
their markets for opportunities to grow the enterprise
- “Things of production” vs “humanity of production”
- Greater Taylorism: the imperative to apply Taylorism to all aspects of operations
- Approaching the 1980s the new goal for strategy was to create wealth for shareholders
- This was part of the “good feelings” era; more inclusive
- Shareholder capitalism would overtake stakeholder capitalism
- MBAs gradually increased between 1970 and 1985
- Selling businesses and layoffs were acceptable shortly after 1982 in order to beat foreign
competition, complete/avoid takeovers and please shareholders
- Freedom of Information Act (1966) and Lexis-Nexis (1970s) were exploited
- Five forces; Suppliers, Potential entrants, Buyers, Substitutes, Industry competitors
- In 1993 stock options became available as executive compensation
- Reengineering was soon discredited for excessive innocent layoffs
- Business schools have revised from educating managers to developing leaders
- Businesses today are more secure and reliable (certain rules are followed, certain
procedures observed)

Main Concept of this article: Mostly just the history of management in the past century
Beyond Theory Y
● “Theory Y” refers to the concept of participative management
● “Theory X,” more commonly referred to as the Classical theory, emphasizes
authority, clearly defined jobs, and authority equal to responsibility
○ The automatic assumption is that people dislike work and need to be
controlled and coerced and directed towards organizational goals
● “Theory Y,” otherwise known as the participative approach, focuses on involving
organizational members in decision making so that they will be more highly
motivated.
○ Assumes that people are interested in their work and want to have
responsibility and autonomy
● McGregor concluded that managers should use Theory Y.
○ He argues that Theory X does not bring out the full potential of human
resources while Theory Y always motivates members.
● This article emphasizes an approach that merges both theory Y and theory X,
which we now call “contingency theory.”
● “The best approach depends on the nature of the work to be done.”
○ Highly predictable tasks = Theory X
○ Less formalized tasks = Theory Y

The study: The successful companies Akron Plant and Stockton laboratory, where Akron
followed classical theory and Stockton followed Theory Y. The following are the factors that
the study concluded lead to their success and helped them prove the contingency theory.

First factor: TASKS AND WHETHER THE APPROACH SUITED THE TASKS
● Akron’s task was predictable and therefore the classical management theory suited it.
○ Short-term and manufacturing as many units as required is very rigid and
robotic, so the company controlling how much of what is produced is a good fit
for the organizational goals
● Stockton’s loose formal practices made sense because the activities were also
less formalized.
○ Long-term and scientific goals of Stockton allowed for Theory Y and
promoted autonomy and creative scientific output.

Second factor: PERCEPTION OF STRUCTURE

● The people in Akron perceived a lot of structure and felt that they were monitored
and this made them work harder because they knew that they lost money every time
they made a mishap in the plant
● The scientists in Stockton perceived a lot less structure and this encouraged
their individualistic creativity
Third factor: DISTRIBUTION OF INFLUENCE
● In the Akron plant, the personnel felt like they didn’t have much influence over their
decisions and the tasks were already set. The influence was “top-heavy” and the
members perceived themselves to have low levels of freedom.
● In the Stockton laboratory, scientists had autonomy and the influence felt more
equally distributed. The Stockton scientists thus felt their expertise was being used
efficiently.

Fourth factor: RELATIONS WITH OTHERS

● In the Akron plant, people felt a great deal of similarity among themselves in
background and prior work experience. They felt like a unit.
● In Stockton, each scientist perceived the differences between themselves. This was
appropriate for the laboratory as there were a vast array of disciplines and skills
required to solve the problems in the library.

Fifth factor: TIME ORIENTATION

● Akron’s individuals were highly oriented towards one goal that needed to
be accomplished under a short time span
● Stockton’s researchers had a longer time span and more scientific goals that required
the longer time span

Sixth factor: MANAGERIAL STYLE

● Individuals in both Akron and Stockton felt that their managerial teams cared more
for the task than for people or relationships.

Then, the study concludes on the note that the contingency theory should be developed and
applied by managers.
2 - Boost Your Emotional Intelligence with These 3 Questions

To develop EI strengths, individuals should consider areas for improvement others have identified

Starting with asking 3 questions

1) What are the differences between how you see yourself and how others see you?

This is important for the development of emotional intelligence. Doing so can help us identify how our
emotional components really are.

Example: We may think that we are good listeners but in other people's perspective we are not. There are

multiple ways to measure EI unlike IQ, there are many types.

Four separate aspects: Self-awareness, self-management, social awareness and relationship

management.

Within those 4 there are 12 aspects.

Emotional and Social competency index - takes into account multiple facets of EI and gives you a
better sense of where the differences lie between your self-perception and your reputation
Emotional and Social Competency Index or ESCI-360: was developed by Dan with Richard
Boyatzis of Case Western Reserve University and Korn Ferry’s Hay Group.

Note: Different organizations have their own assessments.

Getting a coach - Another to get an outside perspective to see how your actions impact your
relationships and your work is to get in touch with a coach. A coach can help guide you learn about
yourself and how assumptions and personal narratives may be working against you.

2) What matters to you?

When you know more about yourself whether from an assessment or coach, it is important to know what
your goals are. This can help you know what you want your next steps to be.

How/What you improve your EI should be about what YOU want, not a boss or HR . Your EI is tied
with who you are so making changes to your long term habits which makes it more important.

Ask yourself your goals: What do you want to be better at? Being a teammate? Possibly getting
leadership positions? Better at managing yourself> Better connection with partner(spouse) or kids

3) What changes will make you achieve these goals?

Once you know which EI skill to focus on. Make sure to work on what specific steps you can do to
achieve it.

Practice the skill at home or at work. Make sure to practice and to know how to react in different,
common situations. Doing this makes the connections in your brain circuit stronger.

At first this requires a lot of effort as it is difficult to form new habits. As time goes on and you practice
more your brain pathways(new) become stronger and it comes more naturally.
- One day to reach neural landmark, which makes the new habit kick in automatically
2- Great Teams Are About Personalities, Not Just Skills

● EI and a high degree of team communication are the drivers of effective

team performance
● Google’s research claimed that the personality of individuals in a group is not so
relevant; however, this HBR article is attempting to disprove this
● Wider scientific evidence shows that personality affects
○ The role you take in a team
○ How you interact with the team
○ Whether your values align with the team
● Teams are more about psychological factors than technical skills
● "More-effective teams were composed of a high number of cool-headed, inquisitive,
and altruistic people."
● Because who you are affects how you interact with other people, team members
that interact with each other in similar manners form more cohesive groups
● People play two roles when they are in teams:
○ Functional role (leader, secretary, etc)
○ Psychological role (based on the type of person that they are)
■ Psychological team roles consist of:
● Results oriented
● Relationship focused
● Process and rule followers
● Innovative and disruptive thinkers
● Pragmatic (prudent, emotionally stable challengers of ideas)
■ If a team has too much or too little of any of these, it’ll negatively impact
the end product.
3 - How to Take the Bias Out of Interviews

➢ While unstructured interviews consistently receive the highest ratings for perceived
effectiveness from hiring managers, studies have found them to be the worst predictors
of actual on-the-job performance
○ Much less reliable than general mental ability tests, aptitude tests, or
personality tests
○ This resistance of not switching to a different method (such as decision aids,
tests, structured interviews, mechanical predictors) is called “the greatest
failure of I-O [industrial and organizational] psychology” (psychologist Scott
Highhouse)
➢ The unwillingness to give up a much-loved evaluation approach seems to be driven by
two factors:
○ 1) Managers are overconfident about their own expertise and experience
○ 2) They dislike deferring to more structured approaches that might outsource
human judgement to a machine
➢ When bankers, lawyers, and consultants were interviewed they reported that they
commonly look for someone like themselves in interviews.
○ Ex. Male bankers hiring more male bankers and female teachers hiring more
female teachers
➢ Ex. Texas government made a law that required the University of Texas Medical School
to increase the class size of entering students from 150 to 200 after the admissions
committee had already chosen its preferred 150 students
○ Allowed University of Texas researchers to examine whether the initial
ranking mattered for the students’ performance in and after medical school
○ The performance of initially accepted and initially rejected students turned out
to be the same
○ The difference in ratings was not due to more-objective measures (such as
grades), but rather to the interviewers’ perceptions of the candidates in the
unstructured interviews
➢ Managers should invest in tools that have been shown to predict future performance.
○ This is better than interviews because interviews are fraught with bias and
irrelevant information
○ Ex. Compose, a cloud storage company, decided to completely do away with
resumes and instead evaluate job candidates based on how well they solved a
job- related problem.
➢ Companies should rely on a structured interview that standardizes the process
among candidates, eliminating much subjectivity
○ Pose the same set of questions in the same order to all candidates = allowing
comparisons between them
 ○ Remains an underused approach
○ Also should require the interviewer to score each answer immediately after
it’s provided = neutralizes a variety of biases
○ Evaluators who wait until the end of the interview to rate answers risk forgetting
an early or less-vivid but high quality answer or favoriting candidates that used
a storytelling style
➢ It is best to compare candidate responses horizontally
○ If you interview five candidates, compare each of their answers on question one,
then each answer on question two, and so on.
○ Ideally, evaluators hide their assessment of question one from themselves,
obscuring it from view, to reduce the chance that the answer will influence
scores on subsequent questions.
■ This complicates evaluation, but it is worth identifying any
internal inconsistencies
➢ Comparative evaluations not only help us calibrate across candidates but also decrease
the reflect to rely on stereotypes to guide our impressions
○ Ex. Biases that lead us to expect women to be better at stereotypically female
jobs like nursing, and men at stereotypically male jobs, like engineering -- Occurs
when we focus on and vertically evaluate one candidate at a time
○ Likewise, people are less likely to rely on whether a candidate “looks the
part” when evaluating several candidates simultaneously and comparing
them systematically
➢ Managers should also abandon panel, or group interviews altogether
○ Best to keep interviewers as independent of each other as possible
➢ While it’s exceedingly difficult to remove bias from an individual, it’s possible to
design organizations in ways that make it harder for biased minds to skew judgement
➢ Work-sample tests, structured interviews, and comparative evaluation are the smart and
the right things to do, allowing us to hire the best talent instead of those who look the part
Research: To Reduce Gender Bias, Anonymize Job Applications

● Note: this article focuses mostly on gender bias, but sometimes mentions race
and other stuff.
● There are some suggestions that anonymizing details about the applicant, like
removing their name, leads to less discrimination in job applications, but no one has
taken these steps yet
● Women are only about 28% of the STEM workforce
● Studies suggest that “the bar is higher for women than it is for men.”
● Research confirms that anonymizing can mitigate gender i=bias in review of STEM
applications
○ When indications of gender were removed from applications, women were
selected at a higher rate than they were when their gender was obvious
○ When symphony orchestras anonymized applications, the percentage of women in
the top 5 US orchestras increased from 5% to 25%.
● “Before any anonymization, men outperform women by 5%. After gendered names
were removed, that number dropped to 3%. When the applications were fully
anonymized, women outperform men by 1%.”
● The change in women’s success rates was primarily due to changes in how
male reviewers perceived their applications, not female reviewers
● Gender, race, age, and other differences create bias in the selection process, which
leads to error
● Trying to reduce bias often fails to be effective; anonymizing applications eliminates
the possibility of that bias’s impact on decisions completely
● It’s also better than implementing a quota because quotas create the perception that
women are receiving preferential affirmative action; anonymization would ensure
that this would not be the perception
● This doesn’t impact earlier factors that affect why an individual chooses a career
path, like representation
4 - 4 Reasons Good Employees Lose Their Motivation

● Managers are often lost as to how to effectively motivate uninspired employees.

○ Key; Managers identify reason of lack of motivation, then apply targeted
strategy.
○ Assessing motivation before taking action is crucial
● Wrong strategy can make lack of motivation falter further back
● Reasons people lose motivation falls into 4 categories (Motivation Traps)
● Values Mismatched; “I don’t care enough” (Trap 1); When task doesn’t connect/
contribute to something workers value
○ How to get out of this trap:
■ Conversation/ perspective-taking, identify employees cares/ values and
connect to task
○ Different values one can draw out:
■ Interest value:
● How compelling a task is
● Find connections between task/ employees interest
■ Identity Value:
● How central the skills set by task is to employee’s self-
conception.
● job draws capacity they consider important for identity/ role.
○ EX: Engaging in teamwork
■ Importance Value:
● How important a task is
● Highlights crucialness of task to achieve company mission
■ Utility Value:
● Measure cost of achieving (& avoiding) task vs. larger benefit of
achieving.
● Show that task contributes to their goals/ benefits future/
prevent problems
○ If employee doesn’t value take at outset/ values, try appealing multiple
values.

● Lack of Self- Efficacy; “Don’t think Im able to do this” (Trap 2); Workers believe
they lack capacity to carry a task
○ How to get out of this trap;
■ Build employees confidence and competence
● Point past times employee overcame a similar task/ others like
them, who overcame similar challenges.
■ Build Self Efficacy
● Progress to difficult tasks/ breaking down task.
● Lack of Self- Efficacy; think succeeding at a task will require
more time/energy than they can afford.
● Inflated self- efficacy: Over confident people make mistakes,
 Doesn’t take responsibility for failures.
○ Important to avoid challenging their abilities/ expertise.
■ Instead; show they misjudged task, that it requires a different approach,
and to express confidence in task.

● Disruptive Emotions; “I’m too upset” (Trap 3): Workers consumed with negative
emotions (anxiety, anger, etc) aren’t motivated to carry out a task
○ How to get out of this trap;
■ Active Listening
■ Say you understand, will lead to the negative emotions soften
■ Angry Employee; tell them to reframe their belief about the external.
■ Depressed Employee; suggest they’re not “broken”, need invest effort
in effective strategies, offer help.
■ Anxious Employee; positive with assistance, remind they’re
capable, can succeed
○ If emotions not soften with time/effort/ spring out, advise counseling

● Attribution Errors; “Don’t know what went wrong” (Trap 4): Employees cant
accurately identity reason for struggle with a task/ attribute struggle with reason beyond
their control
○ How to get rid of this trap;
■ Help employee think/ identity cause of struggle/ why task seems
impossible
■ Attribution error: Employees find excuses no to do a task
● Ex: Calling in sick, “not enough time”
■ If employee identifies cause out of their control, suggest causes under
their control

Overall;

● Motivation Traps; trick is to think more comprehensively about what stops employee.
● When motivation goes off rails, identifying the trap, and applying the right
intervention can get things moving again.

4 - What Maslow's Hierarchy Won't Tell You About Motivation

● The article touches on the complexity of motivation.

● Maslow Hierarchy of need is popular but doesn’t have a ton of evidence to back it up

● Self-Determination Theory researchers and thousand studies point towards three

universal psychological needs- Autonomy, Relatedness and Competence

● Autonomy: people’s need to perceive that they have choices, that people are of their own
volition. To promote autonomy it requires
○ Frame goals as info to assure a person's success rather than to dictate ways to hold
people accountable.
○ Not incentivizing people through games.
○ Don’t apply pressure to perform. Sustaining peak performances of people acting
because they choose to not because they have to.

● Relatedness: people’s need to care about and be cared about by others, to feel connected
without any concerns. Contributing to something greater than themselves. To deepen
relatedness:
○ Ask how people feel for a goal or project in the workplace.
○ Take time to facilitate the feelings in the workplace when it comes to developing
values.
○ Connecting people work with a noble purpose.

● Competence: people feel effective at meeting every-day challenges. Showing skill over time,
feeling a sense of growth and flourishing. Rekindle people’s desire to grow and learn.To
develop people’s competence:
○ Resources available to learn. If budgets are cut when economic cutbacks are towards
values of learning and competence what does that show?
○ Set learning goals - not just the traditional results-oriented and outcome goals.
○ Asking what did you learn, not what you achieved everyday. How did you grow etc.
● Unlike Maslow these needs are foundational to all human beings.

● If these three qualities are met people feel high motivation on their work and passion.

● An example of this is implementing green solutions.

○ Join up with people who are passionate about carbon footprint by DUE DATE
(RELATEDNESS)
○ Read the attached manifesto and see what you learned by DUE DATE
(COMPETENCE)
○ Send a story about what you are doing environmentally responsible by DUE DATE
(Autonomy,Competence,Relatedness)
5a - Root Out Bias from Your Decision Making Process .
Themostvirulentfeaturesthefolowingsteps:
1. Makethedecisionbasedonsomeoralofthefo
lowing:ego,ideology,experience,fear,or
consultationwithlike-mindedadvisers.
2. Finddatathatjustifiesyourdecision.
3.Anounceandexecutethedecision,andd
efenditotheminimumdegre necesary.
4.Takecreditifthedecisionprovesbene
ficial,andasignblameifnot.

● Youmustalwayshaveafulviewofthesituation
● beforemakingachoice.
Makinggoddecisionsinvolveshardwork.
● Importantdecisionsaremadeinthefaceofgre
atuncertainty,andoftenundertimepresure.
● Colectdatafirstbeforemakingadecision
● “DoIrealyhaveabroadenoughperspectivetom
akeanddefendthisdecision?If“no”then
articulatewhy. s
● Confirmationbia
isthetendencytosearchfor,interpret,favor
,andrecalinformationinaway
thatconfirmsorsup portsone'spriorbeliefsorv
alues.
○ Peopledisplaythisbiaswhentheygathero
r ememberinformationselectively,orwhe
n theyinterpretitinabiasedway.
○ Forexample,apersonmaycher ry-
pickinformationthatsup portstheirbelie
f,ignoring whatisnotsup portive.
● Howcanyouavoidthis?
Byadmitingyourlackofconfidenceininstinct
salone.Noonelikesto
admit they’rebiased,but thebestdecisionmake
rsadmit theirpreconceptions.
● Thesecondpartasksyougoagainstyourinclina
tions:
Gathethe
r data you would need to defend this opposite view, and compare it to the data used
to support your original decision
● Before you commit to announcing, executing, and defending your choice, try out your
decision on a “friendly” or two.
○ A friendly is someone who is on your side and wants you to succeed. Here, I’m
referring to someone who wants to protect you and has the courage to honestly tell you
when your thinking is incomplete, when you’ve missed something important, and when
you’re just plain wrong.
5a - The Future of Decision-Making, Less Intuition, More Evidence

Research on intuition

It takes a long time to build good intuition - For example, chess players need 10 years of dedicated
study and competition to assemble a sufficient mental repertoire of board patterns.

Intuition only works well in specific environments, ones that provide a person with good
cues and rapid feedback - Certain environments wont give back accurate indications. Poker and
firegihting might but not for example the future of stock markets. It is impossible to have good intuition
in certain situations. For example there can be intuition about babies in ICU since there is a clear
environment. However, it is hard to have medical intuition after a baby has left the ICU.

We apply intuition inconsistently - Experts themselves can be inconsistent. Simple models created by
psychologists from criteria they made. The doctors themselves were given new patients and then the
doctors were able to use the new models made from their criterias.

It was found that the models did a better job at diagnosing the new cases than the humans who built them.

It’s easy to make bad judgments quickly - People have biases that cloud our assessments of
situations. For example if you ask a question about the average price of german cars, whether its higher or
lower than a certain price. If you use a high number, people will base it on high end companies. But if
you use a lower number people will use a different company.

We can’t tell where our ideas come from - It is difficult to know whether an idea is from legitimate
expert intuition or a pernicious bias. We have lousy intuition about our intiotion.

How to be better?

Using statistics techniques instead of human intuition. Not perfect but pretty good according to most
statisticians.

Statistics can be used for almost anything: cars or wine What do

we do with human experts?

Evidence-based medicine, to make human decision makers use a computer mediated process that
presents an initial answer or decision generated from the best available data.
5b - Figure Out Your Manager's Communication Style

● As you engage with your boss in everyday activities, try to identify the messages
behind their speech and behaviour
● The values that underlie the words and deeds often mean more
● The statement “My door is always open” could have varying meanings. For
example:
- It could be meant literally, the boss wants employees to feel free to
approach them in person at any time
- The boss might want to seem easy to approach and always available, but their
door isn’t necessarily always open. They really view email and team meetings
as a legitimate way to reach them.
- An “open door” could be a metaphor for how colleagues work together. The
boss still wants people to consider proposals carefully before voicing them and
wants to give people the mental space to do their work quietly. Open door does
not mean instant response.
● Questions to help figure out your manager’s preferred style of interaction:
- Is my manager a listener or a reader?
- Do they prefer detailed facts and figures or just an overview?
- How often do they want to receive info?
● Tips to be more efficient when communicating with your manager:
- When discussing deadlines, use specific language; avoid vague
commitments
- Be honest about what you can/cannot handle
- Explicitly identify your objectives
- Ask questions to clarify what you don’t understand & inquire about
opportunities for follow-up
5b - Nonverbal Cues Get Employees to Open Up - or Shut Down

● Studies on power posing show that intentionally adjusting your body posture,
facial expressions, and voice can help you express your ideas and concerns and
win greater influence.
● The effect of this will be in full force in any kind of hierarchy, whether it’s based on
formal or informal status.
● Studies have shown that leaders send “I’m the boss” signals unintentionally, and
these signals prevent others from coming to them with new ideas.
● Becoming more aware of your power cues and making small adjustments can
make people more comfortable approaching you.
● How you sit, keeping your arms at your side, lowering your voice, dressing
less formally, smiling, and behavioural cues (such as sitting at the same table
as everyone else at lunch or not being the first to articulate a point of view at
meetings) can make people more likely to share their thoughts with you.
● Physical environment also has an impact, such as an office with dark paint and
big wooden furniture vs light paint and a small round table.
● Also, getting out of your office altogether (off-site activities, visits with lower-
level employees) can be an effective way to make people feel more relaxed and
comfortable opening up.
● Overall, small power cues send big messages, and managing them deliberately
to promote open expression can foster better ideas from employees and greater
engagement and loyalty.