+ 98 98199 80088, + 91 97698 46880

What TRIGGERS Employee Experience


What TRIGGERS Employee Experience

What Triggers Employee Experience

In, Closing the Loop: The Dynamics of Creative Learning, Alexander N. Pattakos, says, “Constructing “mind” out of the brain has opened up new avenues for developing models that intend to explain visual perception and cognition, memory, and related functions of the intellect. Moreover, explicit attention is being paid to the neurophysiological bases of creative and intuitive thinking. Are minds, as suggested by MIT Professor Marvin Minsky, “simply what brains do?” Or, are there models of mind and consciousness that transcend the boundaries of orthodox materialism? Professor Erich Harth, for instance, takes us out of the old Newtonian world of machine models of the brain and into the almost mystical realm of contemporary physics. In his view, both consciousness and creativity arise from specific structures the relays within the sensory pathways linking the sense organs and the cerebral cortex that send information back and forth”. Employees engage in enterprise actions depending upon their behavioral experiences in what they touch and feel as they act on various role.

“This information, moreover, when it reaches the cortex, is filtered and personalized through improvisation, much like the way children talk to themselves as they practice their language ability. Essentially employee experiences need to be captured for it to be meaningfully used to enhance such experiences. Human consciousness, manifested as experience, and the creativity that it exhibits, according to Harth, are embedded in a messy, largely intuitive “hall of mirrors” within the biology of the brain. Another perspective that stands in stark contrast to the neurophysiological models that traditionally have attracted the scientific community in large numbers is represented by the work of physicist Nick Herbert, who draws upon the key features of quantum theory to explain human consciousness”.

“Founding his argument on the attributes of quantum systems, that is, randomness, “thinglessness,” and interconnectedness, he posits that mind is a fundamental, process in its own right, much like light or electricity, and that it interacts with matter at an equally elemental, that is, subatomic, level. Human consciousness, employee experience, according to this view, is associated only with quantum systems, learning system experiences, feedback loops, communication channels and reward mechanism as basic systemic drivers for employee experience. In this connection: In his encyclopedic study of the “roots of consciousness,” which draws upon multiple frames of reference, employee behaviors, systems friendliness, historical traditions, folklore, and scientific research and theories, Jeffrey Mishlove, a leading figure in the field of parapsychology and an expert in the practical application of intuition at work, presents further evidence, patterns, norms, rituals, systems, analytics, logical applications, processes to support the distinctively quantum character of the human mind”; that which plays a predominant role in understanding what makes employees engage and seek an enjoyable experience.

Moreover, he explores a wide variety of phenomena long relegated to the realm of the “supernatural” and offers a multidimensional view of reality that expands the meaning of consciousness well beyond the outer limits of neurophysiological explanations and models. Levels of consciousness, often experiential, it seems, include not only phenomena that reside beneath our threshold of awareness, commonly referred to as the subconscious mind but also phenomena that transcend conscious awareness, that is, the so-called nonlocal mind (or superconsciousness). In the lexicon of quantum theory, this state or principle of nonlocality has also been referred to as universal or collective consciousness”.

Processes followed to built employee experience are many.


A young lady talks to a friend on her insecurities about her relationship with a male friend. A couple seeks advice on how do they manage adoption of a child. A staff seeks feedback on how to improve her performance. The linking connection in the above episodes is that the person who is engaged in the counseling begins by listening to the other person. More importantly the other person has sought the support of the counselor. In any behavioral situation, between individuals, groups, teams, inter groups, the process of sharing is critical for the transaction to commence and conclude.

Groups and Individuals manifest behaviorally an intention to act in relation to another interacting body who sees only the former group’s behavior. Between the motive, intention and consequent manifestation arises an encoding process that individuals use to make behavior consistent, clear and congruent with intentions. Although the “employee experience” process can help an individual discover whether the behavior is sync with intended intentions, the process focuses on behavior rather than on intentions. Intent is not good enough. Stating it is essential to make the “Because Tell Me Feedback Effect” happen. The criticality is demonstrated by keeping intentions away as being irrelevant. The fact that many people perceive behavior and its consequences as being negatively intended when in fact it is not is an important reason to consciously eliminate intentions.

In, Managing In and Through the Knowledge Ecology, Steven A. Cavaleri and David S. Fearon quote, Researchers Scott Cook and Dvora Yanow who studied the learning processes of the three major, fine-quality, flutemakers in the United States, say,”All three were located in the greater Boston area; they are : the W. M. S. Hyanes Company, Verne Q. Powell Flutes, Inc., and Brannen Brothers-Flutemakers, Inc. As a result of their research they concluded, Typically, neither the flutes nor the way are made have changed when flutemakers have left one of the workshops. Moreover, the organizational know-how entailed in flutemaking at each workshop is, in significant measure, different from that at the others. Although all three know how to make flutes and all follow similar production operations, each makes its own particular flute, one with a unique, unambiguously recognizable style. Thus part of what each workshop know is unique to it.” The experiences mapped in each of these three enterprises differed for their employees.

“Employee learning, an important aspect of employee experience, often results from a reframing of shared information or accepted common knowledge of how to add value to a product or service. This is in contrast to the “know-why” of comprehending theories or the “know-what” or repeating things that others have done before. All three forms of knowing, including empathy, are important elements for achieving success in organization. However, the importance of actionable knowledge is of greater importance than ever before due to the simultaneous decline of command and control style structures and the rise of high-speed management”.

Empathy is the ability to stand in other person’s shoes – to see the world as they see it. In seeking “tell me” there is an element of vulnerability desired or not that manifests in the transaction. The receiver has “asked for it”. In transaction this turns the sender into a position of superiority of telling somebody so. In fact in many “Tell Me” exchanges, the question of ownership to the happening experience frequently occurs.

And it needs to address:

How much responsibility should the giver assume for his/her behavior and the receiver for his/her response?
What are the pre dispositions that the transacting members bring to the response table?
Is the climate conducive to “tell”?
Empathy involves a certain “forgetting of self” in order to give ourselves up to the other person.

Fundamentally an unequivocal concern for others as well as respect for self is a critical dimension in the exchange of telling. Ownership and experience for what is being said, the consequent display of behavior and the subsequent behavior overlap between the sender and receiver of “tell me is essential. Participants to the act need to take charge of their actions and should feel the possible impact of the change. “Tell me” implies with no ambiguity a cause for introspection. The problem in execution of the effect rests in arriving at a mutual agreement concerning where one person’s responsibility ends and the other’s begins.

The encounter of employee experience commences at the data generation stage when the need to meet in relation to a problem is necessitated. A process of climate setting follows the act of milling around, a process addressed by Carl R. Rogers, as the facilitator makes clear that the activity has unusual freedom. Thereafter follows the actual experience of sharing and building.

Inability to handle any of the above basic processes implies withdrawing from the tell me session.

Some examples:

Define employee concepts and experience terms being used commonly
Define employee experience base line standard
Basic information about participants, more than what is normally known
Areas for me to change and improve given my perception and understanding of self
Current vs Desired Organizational Behavioral Experience
Performance improvement areasInterpersonal skills, conflict management competencies and working with teams.


We seek and desire relationship. We would like to see for ourselves some sense of perpetuity in relationship. Behaviorally this is not alien to basic forms of doing things with people as a fundamental premise. In our endeavor to build relationships it is necessary to ask people how they think, feel and relate in perspective with us. While doing so there is a natural and real possibility of feeling apprehensive and defensive of our self. This could be in our understanding of ourselves, or an impression of a given fact or situation or for strong reasons our self image and perception of ourselves being in dissonance with that of people we relate with. Rogers calls this as resistance to personal expression or exploration. It is the projective individuality that people would like to show each other, and only gradually, fearfully, and ambivalently do they take steps to reveal something of their private self.

There is an eminent possibility of facts appearing to be misunderstood. Logically facts are not expected to be argued. But they are argued. After all it is perception that makes the argument valid not the fact itself. It is possible to downsize a person’s defensiveness in receiving “tell me” and to maximize his ability to use it for his personal growth. Regardless and irrespective of how accurate “tell me” has turned out to be, if an individual recipient cannot accept the information because he is self-protecting or self-defensive, then tell me effect is unlikely to be of a behavioral consequence.


Tell Me must be articulated so that the person receiving it can absorb it objectively.
Clarify employee expectations
It must be stated with limited distortion, understood with an open and honest frame of mind and body, understand it for its use and value, and exercise the choice to use it or not use it.
Make known the impact of every episode as they conclude for members to understand the complete implication of what has transpired and bringing all members up the curve.
The groups are not exclusively self directed.
The facilitator plays a key role in making the group understand at varying intervals their obligation and responsibility to each other.

Steven A. Cavaleri and David S. Fearon quote, “Upon reflection, some managers may discover that it is their own world view which is inhibiting their own effectiveness. Inevitably, those managers who have regarded management to be an acquired skill, which exists largely external to themselves may still be trying to reconcile these two opposing vies. Similarly, other managers have made the simultaneous realization that it often is their own thinking that limits their performance. However, they are encouraged to know that thinking is something that can be changed, and is within their own control more that it is subject to the demands of others. Peter Senge, has offered such managers several means to become masters of their own art and practice of management, namely the tools of systems thinking, personal mastery, mental models, shared vision and team learning. The implications of this shift in outlook from viewing managing as an objective, external activity, to an internal, subjective one are enormous”.


Feelings are not an expression of fact, data, impression, view, stereotype or any other factor extraneous to the human being. Feelings are a part of the natural self and imply coping with emotions.

Five types of emotions that are commonly bottled up:


There is a relationship between these feelings and certain expressions of them. It emanates from the stomach, is open and direct, and is shared without editing. It has no judgmental connotation, it is sensitive, true, and non-evaluative and it is as real as it can get. Feelings form a core part of the human self and in expression of behavior. Behavior is unreal without feelings. Emotions go hand in hand with feelings. Feelings are expressed either directly or indirectly and should say more than words.

Sensitive people and those who wish to listen, observe feelings as expressed by others towards them. It is possible to commit oneself to a feeling, share and express it without reservation and there is no need to guess the feelings. People can be helped if the counselor accepts their emotions. Indirect expression of feelings offers an escape from commitment. “You are driving too fast” is an indirect expression of feelings “I am anxious because you are driving too fast” is a direct expression of feeling.

People frequently assume that they are expressing their feelings directly when they state opinions and perceptions starting with “I feel that….”, but they are not.

For example,

Tell Me needs to meet with the demands made by the receiver to say it with your feelings.
There is a basic need to to be emotionally involved and resilient with the problem to deal with it.
Values have a lot to do for the process to be effective
Complexity in employee experiences can go up or down depending on the degree of emotion engaged in that particular activity
It would be complex and perhaps incorrect to deal with an issue where there is a potential value conflict between the group and the member, or the client and the counselor. For example, I cannot believe in abortion and support a religious dilemma of a member, irrespective of how dispassionate could be personally, to the matter on hand
The issue to bring out in both the sender and the listener a strong reaction of concurrence that we should act upon it, rather than not handle it upfront,

Both should exhibit commitment, courage and willingness to the risk of sharing with feelings, as they emanate while the experience is in transaction.

For example,

withdrawing half way through the episode is not acceptable for it impacts other participating members to the process
we need to go through with and not leave the member (s) half way through the encounter
This implies responsibility
If I cannot I should not participate in “Tell Me”.


Conscious interaction to make a process of sharing happen, real and simple time, place and situation is critical. Fundamental and cataclysmic changes are possible when the performance orientation to develop becomes basic to the interaction. Gross changes are not merely theoretical. They are as implementable as they come. To be most effective, TELL ME should, whenever possible, be given immediately after the event. Delayed communication brings in content fallacies, experience biases, absence of recency and need for quick and efficient change. When feedback is given immediately after the event, the event is fresh in everyone’s mind. It is like a mirror of the person’s behavior, reflected to him/her through the message. There is often, however, a tendency to delay telling.

A person may fear losing control of his feelings, fear hurting the other person’s feelings or fear exposing him/her to other people criticisms. Nevertheless, although the “here-and-now” transactions of group life can often be most threatening or personally intimidating, they can also be most exciting and growth producing. Kurt Lewin factored the concepts of field theory into his work on group dynamics. Wherein the purpose is to study individual in his or her “field”, since events are determined by forces in an individual’s immediate surroundings. This field also called personal life space, is the individual environment of activities, or the social situation around the individual?

Here and now draws extensively from this theory.

Contextually the factors to be considered are:

Human communication process involves both the contents of the mind and its usage to communicate to others
The situation created for this communication should be as real as it can get as far as the data and facts beings processed are concerned
The climate is created to carry out a specific task of communication and the tension is released soon after the encounter
Sharing of employee experience happens meaningfully when there is mutual care and concern for each other’s well being
For a start up state of dominance or submission the gradual process of growth ends with friendly disposition and independence
Adequate interpersonal space, a form of affiliation spans the climate.


A natural paradigm in behavior understanding commences with some assumptions.

Motive to an act is relevant only if data and facts are under investigation.
That behavior happens naturally and is manifested externally owing to values, beliefs and experiences.
Behavior happens irrespective of the motive or the desired intent.
In any event motives or intents are not as important as the behavior itself.
In building relationships what you see and feel is what is available for action.

Interpretation of behavior, post employee experience, is a hair splitting activity not desired by those who wish to build relationships. In addition, one person’s interpretations probably arise from a theory of personality what may not be shared by the other person. In any event, interpreting another person’s behavior or ascribing motives to it tends to put that person on the defensive and makes him/her spend his energies on either explaining his behavior or defending himself. It deprives him/her of the opportunity to interpret or make sense of his own behavior and, at the same time, makes him/her dependent on the interpreter.

Tell Me responds to the manifested behavior, perceptible acts and focused method of doing something. Self worth and dignity is not under evaluation while attempting to understand behavior. While “telling” somebody’s use of a choice of language becomes relevant and important for the transaction to complete. Our actions should elicit an objective response from the listener. Employee experience of a specific form or manner does not imply a permanent nature of a person’s behavioral disposition.

Acting insensitively does not imply an insensitive human being. Our perceptions are directly connected with the senses and cause behavioral influences. It could be on account of visual, auditory, or kinesthetic/tactile. Watching for verbal and non verbal cues like listening to verbs, watching eye movements, data interpretation and management styles, personal likes, preferences and dislikes as they influence behavior. All turn relevant in conducting an unbiased TELL ME transaction. Evaluating a person casts one in the role of a judge and places that person in the role of being judged. In addition, a frame of reference or set of values is imposed that may not be applicable to, or shared by, other people. That is, the employee making the evaluation assumes that he/she can distinguish between a “good” person and a “bad “ person or between “Right” and “Wrong”.

Effectively act only on what has been heard or observed and that can be supported by data generated or acquired legitimately,

That there is no one behavior for any situation,
There is no right or wrong, in fact only interpretation of causes and sources of a problem,
That the behavior was rather interpreted as experimentation and exploring new ways of doing,
That in my/our behavior I could discover myself for who am I
And interpretation is not a measurement, but a tool for seeking clarification

Dr. Ganesh Shermon is a Managing Partner & Lead for North America, Talent Management Platform Solutions with TCS Canada Inc, and earlier a Partner, Country Head and Global Steercom with KPMG LLP.

Posted by ZuzukiSX4  Posted on 14 Mar 
  • culture, Employee experience, Engagement, Leadership, Retention, Talent
  • Post Comments 0