Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Businesses

Only 27% of Managers Worldwide Feel Engaged at Work (msn.com) 48

Posted by msmash from the managers-need-managing dept.
Manager engagement has plummeted to its lowest level since tracking began, with only 27% of managers globally reporting they feel involved and enthusiastic about their work, according to Gallup's annual State of the Global Workplace report. The 3-percentage-point decline from 2023 marks an unprecedented drop in manager satisfaction.

Overall employee engagement fell to 21% in 2024 from 23% the previous year, representing only the second decline in 15 years of data collection. The last drop occurred during 2020 COVID lockdowns. Female managers experienced the steepest decline at 7 percentage points, while younger managers fell 5 points. Managers now oversee nearly three times as many employees as in 2017, yet only 44% have received managerial training.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Only 27% of Managers Worldwide Feel Engaged at Work More

Only 27% of Managers Worldwide Feel Engaged at Work

Comments Filter:

  • Project Managers (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    What do they do besides talk in meetings all day and write emails?

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by RobinH ( 124750 )
      Being a middle manager is an interesting exercise in strategy. You spend most of your time trying to position yourself close to projects that might potentially succeed... close enough to take some credit when they're successful. But you also need to keep yourself far enough removed from each project that you can claim you had almost nothing to do with it if it crashes and burns. It's a lot of work, honestly.

    • Re:Project Managers (Score:5, Interesting)

      by serafean ( 4896143 ) on Wednesday July 30, 2025 @11:13AM (#65555326)

      TBH the best PM I had did only that, but really delivered. He knew which team to contact, where to request work to be done, got us into contact with relevant technical people...
      Essentially he:
      - coordinated work across teams (ie created dependencies of work and got someone allocated to do it)
      - made sure technical discussions happened in a timely manner (was 3 steps ahead of current state of project), within scope (even though he understood at best half of what was discussed) and with the correct people present
      - got time estimates and accounted for delays, so we basically were never "late" even though we hit setbacks.

      Working under him was a breeze, and he was a really nice guy too.

      • The role of a good PM is to have answers no matter who they come from so all the people doing the tasks don't have to be intamitely familiar with what everyone else is doing. The branch off of that is then as the final word on settling disputes.

        I don't know if we're talking software which I dont have as much experieence in so I'm not gonna speak to it but in my line of work (audio visual) the PM is the authority on site, so when I am building the display I don't have to know what the electrician and the ca

        • Yes, software.

          > the PM is the authority on site

          In my case he was the mediator, when things became problematic, and heads started running a little hot, he made us all take a step back and better identify the question at hand.

          And considering our clients were the C-levels, yeah, he dealt with those too, thank god...

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by skam240 ( 789197 )

        It's amazing how much of a difference a good manager can make. Having worked under crappy ones before I value the good ones immensely.

    • In my Fortune 500 "really large computer company", we intentionally kept our remote manager in the dark most of the time to avoid his micromanaging our jobs. We know what to do. All he did is get in our way. Eventually, he "threw our department under the bus" to keep his job. They shut down our lab and later, showed him the door. He was worthless.

      • As a direct manager of a software dev team, I have the same problem with *my* boss, the VP. I consider it one of my primary jobs, to act as a shield between him and the team. As a result, my team is happy and productive. They too know their jobs, so I stay out of the way (of them) and get in the way of executives who want to meddle!

    • Search for engagement surveys?

    • Chase people for timesheets?

  • Break our engagement? I'll break it off in your-- (Score:5, Funny)

    by Pseudonymous Powers ( 4097097 ) on Wednesday July 30, 2025 @10:54AM (#65555282)

    What the HELL? This story is BULLSHIT! I feel enraged at work every GOD-- what? "Engaged", you say? Oh, you're right.

    Never mind. I guess I'll just take the rest of the afternoon off.

  • Doesn't make sense (Score:3)

    by GeekWithAKnife ( 2717871 ) on Wednesday July 30, 2025 @10:56AM (#65555288)
    Why would the stat be so high? Managers know they are towing the company line and shovelling bullshit.

    • Maybe because most people, including managers, only do their jobs because they are paid. If the job was something that naturally made people feel enthusiastic, involved, and engaged, then plenty of people would do it for free.

  • ....making sure people are engaged with their job part of a manager's job? So they're feeling the effects of them not doing their job?

  • Unless you own the company (Score:3)

    by khchung ( 462899 ) on Wednesday July 30, 2025 @11:03AM (#65555304) Journal

    or you are compensated heavily based on the company's profit, it is foolish to be engaged in your job.

    Your job is not your life. Your job is just a means to earn income to support your life. Being "engaged" in your job means sacrificing part of your life for free to benefit the owners of the company. Why would anyone sell themselves short?

    The only exception is when you are properly compensated, see the exceptions at the top.

    Use the money you earned to find fulfilment elsewhere in your life independent of your job. That way, your life will not collapse into emptiness when you lose your job or when you retire.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Rinnon ( 1474161 )

      or you are compensated heavily based on the company's profit, it is foolish to be engaged in your job.

      This is a very culturally relative sentiment.

      Being "engaged" in your job means sacrificing part of your life for free to benefit the owners of the company.

      That really depends on what you mean by "engaged". I don't think that it has to mean you are putting in free overtime or hustling so much that you burn yourself out. It can just mean that you are present in the moment when you are at "the office". Put in the effort to do a good job, build professional relationships with your co-workers and bosses, try to think about what actions you can take while you are at work that are best for the company... and then leave th

    • Being "engaged" in your job means sacrificing part of your life for free to benefit the owners of the company.

      No, that is not what "engaged" means. Someone who is engaged is someone who is self-motivated and interested in doing as well as they can at their job well. That might mean that they are willing to put in extra time when needed but it is by no means a requirement.

      I have seen people who work for institutes that, like you, seem to equate being a good worker with spending inordinate amounts of time working and often those are some of the least engaged people I know: being expected to turn up at all hours r

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Zak3056 ( 69287 )

      Your job is not your life.

      Agreed completely.

      Your job is just a means to earn income to support your life.

      Still with you.

      Being "engaged" in your job means sacrificing part of your life for free to benefit the owners of the company.

      Err... what? There's no "for free" involved, that's where the whole "earn income to support your life" bit comes in.

      By all means, don't make your job your life--there are certainly better things out there. But being asked by your employer to give a fuck and put some effort in is certainly not a bridge too far.

  • "Work Sucks, That's Life."

  • Bonuses (Score:3)

    by fluffernutter ( 1411889 ) on Wednesday July 30, 2025 @11:48AM (#65555400)
    We are 98% of people competing for 5% of the wealth. Of course life is empty, there are no cash rewards any more.

    • What would a slave do with cash? Slaves don't need cash. They need to work or die so another slave can do the work. Slaves are completely interchangeable. Slaves do not matter. You use them as long as they are useful to you then discard them. More will be available.

  • ...lots of managers are useless and often impede progress

    • What I learned is that management must be hard, because so many people do it so badly. Part of the problem though is that management is very different from actually doing the work. All too often people are promoted from doers to managers without any real idea or training in what a manager is supposed to do. The military (where managers (officers) screwing up can get people killed) tries to train people at each new level of responsibility. They do not always succeed, of course, but they try. Maybe if mo
      • I think you hit the nail on the head. Too many 'doers' want to be paid more and progress on their careers but in too many countries the only choice is to go into management which means you do a totally different job than you were hired to do.

  • I had a manager once tell me that "work isn't supposed to be fun; that's why they call it work". Yay.

  • I find it interesting that there are never and explicit qualifications for managers, just who likes who enough to give them the position regardless of if they can effectively perform the role

  • You get paid a little more than the people you manage, but usually not more than 15-20%. You spend most of your time in meetings or on the phone. You have to hear about every employee's personal problems that make it so they can't come in for work this week. Everyone hates you just because you're a manager, either secretly or overtly, but they feel they have to suck up to you which they also hate. You will be pressured by senior management to do things that are impossible, and resisted by your subordinates

  • The article lists "lack of training" as a contributor. For me the opposite is true. Mandatory bad training is a huge de-motivator. The training is bad, and forcing me do the training is usually bad. I am not most people though, and can only speak for myself. I find myself filling dual roles as an individual contributor and a manager, and the manager part is the one I would drop in a heartbeat if I could. Dealing with other peoples' problems? No thanks.

  • This survey or analysis or whatever is made up dogshit, and most sane people would ignore a solicitation for participation

  • Engaged doesn't mean 'able to stay conscious' - there's no way it's really 27%.

  • I think it's probably more reasonable to say we have 74% too many managers. (Yes, the overlap is intentional)

  • It's been a fairly noticeable trend since 2020 that people were searching for more meaning from their work, or at least being more vocal when they felt that the workplace was falling short of their expectations. They also demanded the right to work wherever they felt like it and were especially vocal about poor managers. If you believe Reddit, most of the saintly Redditors have bosses that don't understand or respect them! So, managers have increasingly bolshy staff, and are generally struggling with fallin

Slashdot Top Deals

You will have many recoverable tape errors.

Close