A new dominant conversation needs to emerge if we want employee engagement to flourish and our companies to be successful: "You are the life's blood of this company, and we value you."

Statistics confirm that companies with high rates of employee engagement are more successful than companies where such rates are low. But the Gallup Management Journal's Employee Engagement Index shows that only 29% of employees are actively engaged in their jobs, while 54% are not-engaged, and 17% are actively disengaged.

That means that 71% of those polled are lacking loyalty and commitment, and even may be ready to move on.

But Employee Engagement means much more than employees staying put. Major research studies conducted by the likes of The Corporate Leadership Council, The Conference Board, and Towers Perrin show that employees who are engaged, who feel emotionally and intellectually connected to their job, employer, manager, co-workers and customers, contribute discretionary effort to their work. And their combined discretionary effort makes for a very profitable company. Expressed as an equation,

Involvement + Commitment = Engagement = Increased Effort = Better Results.

So why is the status of employee engagement so dangerously low, if it is a leading factor in success?

If we look at US corporate culture over the last sixty to one hundred years, it's based primarily on two models. One is the industrial manufacturing model, where people were viewed as on an assembly line, and the mantra is "No thinking, please." Another is the military model, where workers respond inside a chain of command. The corporate world back then was dominated by a conversation that goes something like this, "You're a machine, and the best you can do is follow orders." Workers were viewed as "assets and liabilities," or "resources." Both of these models pretty much held sway until the 1970s, when some significant forces began to challenge the dominant conversation.

As Baby Boomers began their careers, they were heavily influenced by the long wave effect of the 60s social revolution, which said, "Question Authority." Women entered the workforce in higher numbers, bringing with them the idea that relationships are just as important as results. They used alliances and networks, not hierarchy, to get the job done. Globalization was added to the mix, and diverse groups brought their own perspectives and values into the workplace. Finally, the Internet's free access to information and communication empowered everybody, and workers started to ask, "Why does it have to be done this way?"

This employee dissatisfaction festered in the 80s and 90s, as corporations became dismal places to work. Jobs got more mechanized and computerized, wages went down, guaranteed employment became a thing of the past, average workers spent more time at their jobs with intrusions from phone, fax, email and companies embraced outsourcing. These factors eroded workers' sense of security and their motivation. In a fractured work force, no one wanted to make a discretionary effort. Employees weren't engaged. The research shows they still aren't.

Even today, corporations cling to the old models and talk the old talk. The thinking goes something like this: you are either profitable or care about your employees; you are either results-driven or you are a tree-hugging environmentalist. Human capital strategy is still predominantly black or white. Leaders of companies tend to deal in statistics and numbers, and sometimes don't look at what's behind those stats and numbers — people. Another reason for low employee engagement is the mainstream press, which has misrepresented companies that have demonstrated profitability while treating people and the environment as aberrations.

A new dominant conversation needs to emerge if we want employee engagement to flourish and our companies to be successful: "You are the life's blood of this company, and we value you. We are committed to a higher purpose that causes shareholder value while also making a difference in the world."

In the next article in this series, we'll look at some strategies companies are using to foster higher levels of employee engagement.