There are many anecdotal ways that this can be exemplified. Here I present two based on real-life experiences.
When working in large corporations (small ones too, I suppose) with levels of management such as directors, regional managers, local managers, supervisors, etc. there tends to be a desire to seem “engaged.” Everyone must be engaged. The blame for employee dis-engagement is typically borne by the employee. Sure, there may be some language and conversation about “what can we do to better engage our workforce.” And many of those are genuine. However, despite those efforts, if someone is not engaged, it's them, not the company. Even if efforts are actively being made to improve engagement: not engaged = bad employee."
That was a bit of a setup for the first example.
See, I'm Engaged!
On a typical conference call, a new service or feature is demonstrated. (Remember this is what I do so my example is based around this environment). It will go something like this:
“Hi everyone, we now have the ability to send you data, real-time, via Teams. You'll get the data right on your desktop and mobile phone. This will make you better and get you the results you want. If you got the website you can sign-up, set options and a schedule. It's available now.”
Then, some leadership-level person will say, “Who wants to get signed up for this new service? Tony can sign you up right now and start getting the real-time data that will make you better!”
How many people do you think will raise their hands and indicate they want to participate? If you didn't say 95% or more then you've never been there.
Everyone MUST look engaged in front of the evil overlords (bosses, leadership, supervisors, c-suite, et al.). And if you don't raise your hand and say “ME!” you don't look engaged. Yet, you didn't do yourself any favors by having 100% participation.
Dis-Engaged
The above example is based on a true story. And as you can imagine, 100% participation. Everyone wanted the widget. At every level. This is not the realm of plebs on the frontline, bottom of the barrel, the wannabes of management. This is at every level, because every level has someone above them looking down. So, the 100% participation resulted in single digit engagement. No one clicked the links. No one drilled into the details. Because everyone just ignored the notifications, made Outlook rules, blocked, silenced, were desensitized what happened. They didn't truly understand or yet digest what was being offered. Not everyone hears a 15-minute dog & pony schpeal and is ready to sign up. Most folks take a minute.
Self-Engaged
That sucked (and it was a lot of work). Future rollouts were done differently. No more automatic stuff. Pure self-service. You want, you go get. Up to you. The demos are meant to show advantages and how it can help you do your job and if you're interested, sign up for it, enable it, check the box. No longer, need it? Disable it. Come back later when it's needed. But, now when something does come in, they signed up for it. They wanted this thing.
It's no different than getting emails from someone you signed up for (e.g., a weekly newsletter) versus some company that asked for your email for 10% when all you wanted was to buy your mom a wooden dragon for Christmas. Which one are you actually reading, and which one gets deleted?
A lot of folks have a hard time with this. Usually, the next question is “Tell me who's using it.” This is a tricky one. There are two scenarios, depending on who's asking.
1 - Do we have users, did we engage, did the demo drive home the product, is there benefit, what's the enable/disable churn, etc. that can be used to make the product better. This is a valid question, and the data can tell you that. This is a good use for the ask.
2 - Which one of my employees are not using it, so I can yell at them and tell them they need sign up by Friday. GoTo: “Dis-Engaged.” There was a time when usage reports were available, with the intent to display opportunities and tools that are available that are not being used. But it just became a club to hit people over the head with to ensure they signed up and were “100%.” These type of reports are rarely made and data is either not presented or presented a bit more anonymously.
The Power of Why
If you truly want to something to work, you want folks to use the tools available to them: sell them on it. Convince them. Tell them why.
I once ran a crew of 20 technicians for a corporation. One of my goals was to get them to perform better. But another role was for them to follow certain rules or policies. No, “it's the company's policy” is not enough - especially if you're not babysitting them or have them in the same office as you. Something I learned from one of the many management classes I took was (and probably one of the most powerful) was to “tell them why” something needs to be done. Most people are sensible. But they won't do things they don't agree with, irrespective of the rules. However, if they understand the Why something needs to get done, even if they personally think it's silly, they are much more likely to do it. Tell them why.
A completely concocted example of an exchange:
Me: “I need everyone to start labeling the boxes that you open. Just put the sticker and initial it.”
Them: “That's a waste of time! I don't want to. I don't have stickers."
Me: “It's critical we do it because we're going to get audited and for every box that they find has been labeled we get ….”
Them: “Sucks. But OK.”
While that was completely made up, it's similar to many a dialog I had with my team. Whether they agreed or not, they now understood the reason. That did not mean that 100% of them did the ask. But it was a much higher percentage of employees than when the reason given was “I said so.”
This works with kids, too. Parenting is a lot like managing people. Do as I say, not as I do only works for a few years :)
This post is a bit long.
If you're going to track something, make sure you don't artificially increase your engagement to satisfy a different need