Latest news with #StateoftheGlobalWorkplace2025
Irish Examiner
8 hours ago
- Business
- Irish Examiner
Holiday hoarding: are you taking all of your annual leave?
Hoarding is harrowing. For visual artist Andy Warhol, it was time capsules. 600 of them. Stuffed with half a million items - one of which was pizza crust. For film-maker Stanley Kubrick, it was thousands of boxes, chock-full of career remnants. Intriguingly, both capsules and boxes were meticulously dated by the avid gatherers - punctilious pinpricks of discipline amid a clutter of accumulated excess. As for what drives a hoarding mentality, the Mayo Clinic website throws light on the topic, namely that 'hoarding individuals have a greater prevalence of personality disorders, especially schizotypal, dependent, avoidant, and obsessive-compulsive.' While that's interesting, it doesn't apply to holiday hoarding. It doesn't explain why increasingly, workers are holding on to paid leave. Not taking it, so they've nothing to show for it, except perhaps a collection of travel bags that never travel, and a nagging feeling of burn-out. According to the latest FRS Recruitment Annual Leave Report, 42 per cent of employees polled did not use up all of their annual leave the previous year. Of those, a substantial 19 per cent left five days or more untaken. It might be tempting to conclude that workers forfeit paid leave because they love their jobs too much to stay away. But this is unlikely. Published in April, Gallup's State of the Global Workplace 2025 report found that 20 percent of employees felt lonely at work, with 41 per cent experiencing 'significant stress' there. Naturally, when workers aren't thriving, business struggles: American Journal of Preventive Medicine research published in April, indicated that employee disengagement/burnout resulted in $5.04 million in costs over the course of one year. Caroline Reidy is managing director at The HR Suite. Caroline Reidy is managing director at The HR Suite. She's also an expert in employment law. When we talk, she acknowledges that employees who hoard holidays are unlikely to go on the record to admit that. As for employers, she says: 'Since it's illegal, I can't imagine any admitting to allowing the practice.' Asked about the thinking that's behind holiday hoarding, she replies: 'Two things: A perception of 'I'm so busy, so how could I manage to take holidays, then come back to a huge build up of work afterwards?' Also, a culture in which people want to be seen putting work before work-life balance.' What about bullying? 'Absolutely,' she replies. 'If somebody feels they are being bullied, intimidated or put under pressure in the workplace, they may think asking to take some leave will be made into a big deal. 'I've come across scenarios where people say: 'I don't feel I can ask for even a day off, because when I did before, it was questioned so much, and such a big deal was made of it and I was asked what was I really going to be doing on the requested day off.' 'This happens, whereas it should of course, be the case, that in line with normal company policy, a person can apply for their time off and know it will be approved.' She believes that both holiday and protective leave must be respected: 'Because employees are entitled to this time off, we need to put good safeguards around it. Usually organisations have good policies but it's down to the immediate manager and to HR to make sure that the culture is there to support people to be off when they are rostered to be off.' Should managing directors and HR people be policing holiday leave, to ensure workers and taking it and that, except in the case of emergency, they are not being contacted with work queries during that time? 'Management can see if people are taking holidays, but what they can't see is whether they are being contacted by work while they're off. 'For this reason, employees need to be flagged and informed that management expects that everybody is taking their holidays and that they are being allowed to do so undisturbed. And that if this is not their experience, then employees should let HR or management know. 'This extra policing layer is important,' she says. When asked if holiday hoarding is more prevalent in large or small organisations, Catherine replies that it's more the culture of the organisation than the size, and the nature of the manager the worker reports to day-to-day. 'Holiday hoarding is mostly an issue in white collar jobs,' she says. 'Retail workers are likely to get their time off and be permitted to completely switch off when they do.' She's absolutely right, and the worker experience at O'Keefe's artisan food shop, which dates back to 1899, is a case in point. Donal O'Keefe was just 14 years of age when his parents bought that shop and he moved into its premises at Wellington Road, Cork. 'Here, there's never any difficulty with staff taking holidays,' he says. 'Time away is important. A two week break is better than one week.' Was this wisdom passed down to him by his parents? 'It was,' he replies. 'At one point, there were three generations of us working here in the shop. Unfortunately, my mother and grandmother have since passed. But I was taught early on that staff need time off to rest. I learned that from my mother.' Clearly, O'Keefe's is a great place to work. As staff member, Catherine O'Riordan, says: 'Our boss, Donal, is very good to us all. If we need to get off for something or we are going on holiday, we have no bother whatsoever getting time off in here. Everybody covers for everybody else. Like a few others, I'm 20-odd years working here, and I can tell you that here in this business, it's like we are all family.' Read More Dear Dáithí: My perfect girlfriend is horrible to me behind closed doors
IOL News
23-05-2025
- Business
- IOL News
Reimagining the corporate ladder: Why young professionals are challenging the traditional corporate ladder
Young professionals aren't disengaged, they're disillusioned with outdated systems, according to Talent & Culture Strategist, Leadership & HR Expert and Executive Coach, Anja van Beek Image: Pixabay Once a hallmark of ambition and success, climbing the corporate ladder is now being scrutinised by younger generations who are inclined to ask: "Is this even the right wall?" Millennials and Gen Z employees are challenging the old norms of professional advancement, as they prioritise purpose, flexibility, and meaningful work over traditional hierarchical success. While it may appear that these younger workers are simply disinterested in career advancement, their intentions are far more strategic and rooted in a desire for meaningful development. The Gallup State of the Global Workplace 2025 report reveals a staggering statistic: a mere 21% of employees globally feel engaged at work. This disengagement seems to stem from a troubling scenario—managers, the very individuals expected to inspire and lead, are finding themselves burnt out and demotivated. The consequences of poor management ripple downwards, making the ladder seem less appealing to younger workers down the line. Climbing to what, exactly? Younger professionals are seeking growth, but not in the traditional sense. An InStride survey indicates that over 80% of respondents desire educational benefits to help with career development. Yet, with the rise of AI and automation, many industries are becoming unstable, leading to doubts about the security of the professional path ahead. A 2023 McKinsey Global Institute report warns that as much as 30% of current work hours in the U.S. could be automated by 2030—a forecast that is particularly concerning for younger individuals already facing high unemployment rates. In South Africa, youth unemployment stands at a staggering 46.5% for those aged 15 to 34. In this climate, young workers are not merely disengaged; they are discerning. Why climb into a storm where stability is uncertain? The manager dilemma The Gallup report paints a sobering picture of the manager experience. Their increased levels of burnout, coupled with diminished wellbeing and poor work-life balance, paint a grim landscape for those aspiring to lead. In South Africa, where businesses grapple with systemic pressures, the burden on managers can be especially burdensome, fuelling the perception that climbing the corporate ladder may lead only to greater disillusionment. As a result, today's young professionals are taking a more intentional approach to their careers, favouring roles that offer autonomy and purpose rather than blind ascension. This shift represents a substantial cultural change, one that poses a challenge to traditional business structures. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ The purpose paradigm Younger generations are passionate about their impact on the world. According to Gartner, 74% of employees want their organisations to take a stand on societal issues—a sentiment that holds significant weight in South Africa's intricate social landscape. Hence, finding meaningful work is not just a preference but a necessity for today's young talent. What companies can do Adapting to these evolving expectations is crucial for businesses aiming to attract and retain young professionals. Here are some strategies to consider: Create transparent, flexible career pathways: Instead of imposing a rigid ladder, think of building a jungle gym, offering employees diverse paths for exploration, including lateral moves and passion projects. Instead of imposing a rigid ladder, think of building a jungle gym, offering employees diverse paths for exploration, including lateral moves and passion projects. Rethink the manager role: Address the engagement crisis among managers by offering coaching and support that empower rather than drain. Address the engagement crisis among managers by offering coaching and support that empower rather than drain. Invest in skills, not just titles: Cultivating a culture of continuous learning is essential. Companies like AT&T have invested heavily in retraining efforts, showcasing the potential benefits to internal development. Cultivating a culture of continuous learning is essential. Companies like AT&T have invested heavily in retraining efforts, showcasing the potential benefits to internal development. Enable purposeful work: Companies should align their missions with social impact to attract talent motivated by more than just profit. Companies should align their missions with social impact to attract talent motivated by more than just profit. Champion flexibility: Embrace diverse work models that allow employees to balance their professional and personal lives effectively. The Bottom Line The question is not why young people are reluctant to climb the corporate ladder, but rather why organisations have not reimagined this pathway. These disillusioned professionals are not uninterested; they are expressing a desire for a system that resonates with their values—a system that promises well-being and purpose as part of the professional journey. If we want future leaders to flourish, we must create a landscape worth aspiring to. Forget the ladder; it's time for businesses to build something better. IOL
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
01-05-2025
- Business
- Business Standard
30% of Indian employees stressed, 50% wanting to switch jobs, shows report
Around 30 per cent of Indian employees feel daily stress, while nearly 50 per cent want to switch jobs, according to Gallup's 2025 report. The 'State of the Global Workplace 2025' report also indicates that the Employees in the South Asian countries – India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Nepal are experiencing daily anger and stress at a higher percentage when compared to other regions like the United States, Europe, Canada, and Sub-Saharan Africa. The report sheds insights on how employees across the globe feel about their work and lives. It finds that employees, especially managers, are experiencing disconnect from their work. The global percentage of engaged employees fell from 23 per cent to 21 per cent in 2024, the report showed. Even though the decline is not significant, it is estimated to have cost the global economy $438 billion in terms of lost productivity. It is worth noting that the employee engagement in India stood at 30 per cent, higher than the global engagement rate. The employee engagement in India has seen a decline of three points since last year. What is employee engagement? Employee engagement is defined as the involvement and enthusiasm of employees in their work and workplace. It helps in measuring and managing the employees' views on key elements of the workplace. The report suggests that employees can become more engaged when their basic needs are met and the organisation allows them an opportunity to contribute. Condition of Indian employees The report suggests that Indian employees are experiencing anger at a higher percentage when compared with other countries. Currently, in India, 34 per cent of employees claimed that they are experiencing daily anger, which is much higher than in China (18 per cent), Finland (6 per cent). It is worth noting that Finland is the world's happiest country. The report also adds that nearly 49 per cent are actively looking for a new job, indicating dissatisfaction among most employees.
Forbes
30-04-2025
- Business
- Forbes
Gallup's Jim Harter On The Global Engagement Decline Leaders Cannot Ignore
Global Employee Engagement Trend Following the release of Gallup's State of the Global Workplace 2025 report, I sat down with Jim Harter, Gallup's Chief Scientist for Workplace Management and Wellbeing and a leading authority on engagement and wellbeing, to explore what the latest findings reveal about the future of leadership. When you sit down with Jim, you are not just reviewing numbers. You are interpreting what those numbers reveal and what they demand of leaders. Jim has a real knack for seeing what lies behind the numbers, the patterns and possibilities they point toward but do not always explicitly say. The urgency was clear. Global engagement dropped by two points, an estimated $438 billion in lost productivity. This marks only the second global drop in engagement Gallup has recorded, the first occurring in the immediate aftermath of the COVID-19 lockdowns. Two points may sound incremental. But as Jim pointed out, 'What it really signals is a growing detachment, a weakening of energy that organizations rely on, often without realizing it.' That loss is only part of the story. If the global workforce were fully engaged, Gallup estimates that $9.6 trillion in productivity would be added to the economy. That would represent a 9% increase in global GDP, the equivalent of adding an entire top-five economy to the world. The gap between where we are and where we could be is not theoretical. It is real, measurable and enormous. Especially now, when disruption is no longer a single event but a series of aftershocks reshaping work and life. When I asked Jim why CEOs should care about a two-point drop in engagement, he did not hesitate. 'Engagement is not abstract,' he said. 'It shapes whether employees go the extra mile, whether they notice problems and fix them, whether they feel accountable for quality and outcomes.' In a world where every advantage is fragile, disengagement creates invisible risks. Energy drains from teams long before it shows up in performance reports. CEOs who ignore this early warning sign may find their organizations falling behind in ways that are costly and hard to reverse. When I asked Jim what stood out most this year, he was clear and direct. 'It's the managers,' he said. 'They are more overwhelmed than we have ever seen before. And when managers lose their inspiration, it cascades downward.' Gallup's U.S. data shows for the first time that managers report more negative daily experiences than their teams. This is not a small internal issue. It is a system-level threat to culture, performance and resilience. 'The demands on managers have always been high,' Jim said. 'But now they are converging in ways we have not seen before. We are not just dealing with one crisis anymore. They accelerated, reshaping work and life in ways we are still absorbing.' That sense of cascading disruption, what Jim described as aftershocks, struck me. Because what we are seeing today is not only the lingering impact of COVID-19. It is the cumulative effect of a polycrisis, where economic volatility, geopolitical tensions, climate disruption, AI acceleration and social fragmentation collide, magnifying stress across every level of leadership. In my advisory work, I see the same convergence creating conditions where even highly capable managers lose sight of strategic priorities. When the volume of disruption outpaces clarity, managers retreat into operational survival mode and teams follow. Jim emphasized the path forward. 'We have to strip the role down to essentials, clear expectations, meaningful conversations and high accountability. Mastering those three shifts the entire trajectory.' Beyond engagement, Jim highlighted another critical trend, declining thriving. 'In Canada alone,' he pointed out, 'we have seen a 20-point drop in thriving over time. That is not just about work. It is about life experience overall.' Even among remote workers, who report higher engagement, wellbeing metrics lag and job-seeking intent rises. Flexibility without leadership connection creates fragmentation. It is not autonomy itself that sustains engagement. It is autonomy supported by trust, conversation and cultural clarity. Organizations that focus solely on flexibility as a retention tool risk missing the deeper human equation. As Jim noted, 'Thriving and engagement intertwine. Leaders must pay attention to both.' In my experience, when thriving is neglected, it does not show up immediately in turnover or satisfaction surveys. It shows up in discretionary effort, the silent withdrawal of energy that compounds over time. Our discussion naturally turned to AI and its implications for management. Jim framed it crisply. 'AI can replace certain tasks or it can become a companion that strengthens human leadership. Which path we take depends on how intentional organizations are.' Looking ahead, AI will likely raise the baseline for management. Even underperforming managers will sound better, deliver crisper feedback and run smoother check-ins. As Jim pointed out, AI has the potential to reduce variance among average managers by helping them sound more polished and organized in their interactions. But the real risk is a drift toward sameness, where leadership feels polished but hollow. Authenticity, nuance and human connection could quietly erode if AI is used as a shortcut rather than a companion. 'You cannot fake caring—at least not yet,' Jim said. 'In the near term, technology might polish interactions but it cannot replicate authenticity.' At the same time, truly talented managers will use AI differently, not to mimic connection but to deepen it, extending coaching, aligning development to strengths and making leadership more personal, not less. Whether AI amplifies sameness or amplifies authenticity will depend on how intentionally leaders approach it. The challenge ahead is not just about learning how to use AI effectively. It is about protecting the authenticity that makes leadership real. In a world where polished sameness becomes easier, genuine connection will become even more valuable and even harder to fake. Jim raised a key point that few are confronting directly. 'If AI is handling routine outputs, then leaders must redefine what productivity means.' Measuring activity, how many reports filed or how many emails sent, will become obsolete. Future differentiators will be: In one organization I supported, leadership redefined productivity as 'increasing the team's capacity for creative problem-solving.' The shift was subtle but transformational. Managers were coached not only on delivery but on how they built adaptive, resilient teams ready for what came next. Jim reinforced this point. 'Organizations must identify where human variance still matters. As AI shrinks output variance, leadership, culture and innovation will define competitive advantage.' This reframing is not theoretical. It is becoming operational necessity. Jim articulated a truth leaders cannot afford to overlook. 'If you do not define your culture now, you will inherit a culture you did not intend.' Culture is not a background project. It is the system through which resilience, performance and loyalty are either built or lost. The aftershocks of disruption will not subside on their own. If organizations wait for a 'return to normal,' they will find themselves building on unstable foundations. Culture is not what stabilizes after disruption. It is what equips organizations to navigate disruption and emerge stronger. As we closed, I asked Jim what he hopes to see in the State of the Global Workplace 2026. 'I hope we see a rebound in manager engagement,' he said. 'Because when managers thrive, teams thrive.' The opportunity is real. But it is conditional on leadership choices made now, not after disruption accelerates further. Leadership teams face a decision point: The aftershocks of the last five years have reshaped the world of work permanently. The next chapter of leadership will be written by those who build stability not from circumstances but from culture. The real leadership question is: Will your culture be something you intentionally built to endure or something you realize too late you cannot rebuild? Disclosure: My day job is focusing on leadership development and strategy research for Gallup.
