With decades of experience guiding organizations through technological and cultural shifts, HRTech expert Ling-Yi Tsai has a unique vantage point on the modern workplace. Specializing in HR analytics and the integration of technology across the employee lifecycle, she joins us to dissect a seismic shift in the world of work. A recent landmark study analyzing over 20 million employee responses has revealed that for the first time in a decade, the foundational drivers of employee engagement have been completely overturned, forcing leaders to rethink the very nature of the employer-employee contract.
The recent study shows a major shift, with “effective change management” and “confidence in leadership” now topping engagement drivers. What specific, on-the-ground factors have caused this change, and what is the first step a leadership team should take to pivot their engagement strategy?
This isn’t just a minor shuffle; it’s a fundamental reordering of employee priorities, and it’s been brewing for some time. The aftershocks of the pandemic created a widespread “reassessment,” where people began to question what they give to an organization and what they truly get in return. Now, layer on top of that the constant drumbeat of economic uncertainty, global political tensions, and the very real anxiety surrounding AI and job security. Suddenly, the nice-to-have perks and even the feeling of belonging, which topped the charts from 2016 to 2024, feel secondary. The ground feels shaky, so employees are looking up—not just to their direct manager, but to the senior leaders—for reassurance that the entire structure is sound. The very first step for a leadership team is to stop assuming a strong brand and decent benefits are enough. They need to have an honest conversation in the boardroom, acknowledging that the psychological contract has changed and that their primary role is now to be a visible, trusted source of stability.
The report notes a “disconnect” between what organizations say and what employees experience. Can you share a common example of this gap and outline a communication plan leaders can use to rebuild trust when navigating turbulent changes like restructuring?
The most damaging example I see is when an organization loudly promotes its new employee value proposition—full of wonderful language about career paths and work-life balance—while on the ground, line managers are quietly being told to freeze hiring, justify every penny of their training budget, and cover for vacant roles. The message from the top feels like a fantasy, completely detached from the daily reality of stress and scarcity. When navigating a restructuring, you cannot communicate your way out of a trust deficit with a single town hall. First, leaders must be ruthlessly transparent about the why. Don’t hide behind corporate jargon; explain the business realities that necessitate the change. Second, communication must be a dialogue. This means creating safe, facilitated sessions where employees can ask the hard questions and voice their fears without penalty. Finally, during the process, your actions are the loudest message. How you treat departing employees sends a powerful signal to those who remain. If trust is the goal, you must demonstrate compassion and provide tangible support, showing everyone that people are more than just numbers on a spreadsheet.
With job security and trust in management becoming so critical, what specific data should HR leaders bring to the boardroom to influence strategy? Please provide examples of metrics that prove the financial risk of ignoring these new employee priorities.
HR leaders absolutely must start speaking the language of financial risk and opportunity. It’s time to move beyond engagement scores as a “soft” metric. Walk into that boardroom with a clear, data-driven story. First, use the data from the Perceptyx study to show the direct correlation between “intent to stay” and attrition. You can model this for your own organization: calculate the cost to replace an employee in a key role—recruiting, onboarding, lost productivity—and then show how a 5% drop in “intent to stay” translates to a multi-million dollar liability. Second, leverage findings like the Korn Ferry survey, which found that eight in ten workers stay in a job because they trust management. You can map your own internal trust scores against turnover rates by department. When you show the board a chart where low trust in leadership directly predicts high, costly turnover, the conversation shifts. You’re no longer talking about feelings; you’re presenting a clear financial imperative to invest in effective leadership and change management.
The article states that when change is handled well, employees report higher commitment and pride. Could you detail a step-by-step process for managing a significant organizational change that not only informs employees but also actively involves them to boost their “anticipation of success”?
Absolutely. This is about transforming change from something that happens to employees into something that happens with them. Step one is to frame the narrative. Don’t just present the business case; build an emotional and logical case for why this change is necessary and how it creates a more successful future for everyone. Step two is co-creation. Instead of finalizing the plan in a vacuum, identify areas where employees can have a real impact on the “how.” Create project teams or task forces with people from different levels and departments to work on implementation. This isn’t just for show; it leverages their expertise and creates genuine ownership. Step three is to over-communicate with a clear feedback loop. Use every channel available, but ensure there are clear, monitored pathways for people to ask questions and voice concerns. Finally, and this is critical, equip your frontline managers. They are your change champions. Give them the training, the information, and the authority to lead their teams through the uncertainty. When people feel heard and see their own fingerprints on the final plan, their fear of the unknown is replaced by an energizing anticipation of success.
What is your forecast for how employee engagement drivers will evolve in the next five years, and how might the concept of “anticipation of success” change in response to AI and ongoing economic uncertainty?
I foresee the focus on leadership trust and organizational stability becoming even more pronounced. The volatility we’re experiencing isn’t a temporary storm; it’s the new climate. In this context, the idea of “anticipation of success” will evolve significantly. It will shift from a focus on a linear career path to an “anticipation of relevance.” As AI continues to reshape jobs, the most pressing question on an employee’s mind won’t be “Can I get a promotion?” but rather “Is my organization committed to helping me adapt and reskill so my career remains viable?” Engagement will be deeply intertwined with a company’s visible commitment to continuous learning, talent mobility, and proactive career development. The psychological contract of the future will include an implicit promise from the employer to be a partner in ensuring an employee’s long-term employability, not just their security in the current role. Success will be defined by agility and growth, and the most engaged employees will be those who feel their organization is genuinely investing in their future relevance.