The Number Nobody Measures
You measure engagement, output, and turnover risk. You almost certainly don't measure loneliness, and it may be the signal that predicts the others before they move.
You measure engagement, output, and turnover risk. You almost certainly don't measure loneliness, and it may be the signal that predicts the others before they move.
People wait for a better role to be handed to them. The research says reshaping the job they already have moves engagement more than a new title does. It starts with one question in your next 1:1.
Structured interviews predict job performance about twice as accurately as the free-flowing kind. The difference isn't the questions. It's whether every candidate answers the same ones.
Companies write down a version of their culture, then act surprised when the real one diverges. The handbook is a wish. The culture is what happened the last time someone tested a stated value and nobody pushed back.
Generic recognition doesn't scale. Specific recognition doesn't happen often enough. One five-minute Friday practice solves both at once.
Mandatory seatbelts cut driver deaths. They raised pedestrian deaths. Drivers drove faster when they felt safer. The same pattern runs through workplace safety programs.
Most wellness platforms ask "how are you today?" That data averages to noise at the org level, because mood is yesterday's sleep. Climate (growth, agency, meaning) changes on month-scale.
Teams accumulate meetings, rituals, and processes that stopped making sense six months ago. Nobody removes them because nobody is asked to. One 45-minute meeting a month, with a single question, fixes that.
We think people noticed our slip. Mostly they didn't. Gilovich's research shows we overestimate how much others watch us by about twice the actual rate.
Most culture programs fail because they treat culture like a destination. It isn't. It's a gradient that shifts every day in small, mostly invisible ways. The question is which way it's drifting.
We remember the decisions that worked and revise the ones that didn't. Neither pattern makes us better judges. One four-line entry per decision, read back monthly, does.
When teachers were told random students were "academic bloomers," those students posted 10-25 point IQ gains in a year. The same effect runs through your team, whether you know it or not.