When I see someone is taking ‘Annual Leave’ it always makes me smile, thinking of the individual casting themselves as a ‘corporate warrior’ boldly fighting the good fight on behalf of department, division and organisation.
Being the visual thinker I am I also get mental pictures of someone being armed with the tools of war including shield and sword, for which we can read laptop and mobile phone (obviously in one of those belt mounted quick draw holsters ready for immediate action).
But is there a more serious side to people using this phrase? Could it be an indicator of a degree of disengagement with an organisation?
We can consider motivation as a desire to achieve something and/or utilise certain behaviours and engagement as a longer term, deep psychological link to both the organisation and management. So if someone is using language that implies asserting their entitlement to get away, break links and leave work behind are they heart and soul aligned to the business?
Perhaps the term has crossed over from those who have spent time in the services but in order to ascertain if individuals and teams are fully on board why not conduct a quick audit using the Towers Perrin top five issues influencing engagement:
- Senior managers having a sincere interest in employee well being.
- Employees being able to improve their skills.
- Senior mangers leading by example.
- Having challenging work to do.
- Employees having the appropriate authority to do a good job.
Honest positive responses to each of these will most likely mean an environment conducive to having motivated and engaged employees and the term ‘Annual Leave’ is just that, a term. We can then just surmise that those using mobile phone holsters do want to be there… but may prefer to be a cowboy (it is a mainly male trait!).