The Value of Employee Engagement in the Age of Digital …info.forbes.com/rs/790-SNV-353/images/Silkroad_REPORT... · 2020-02-23 · additional recruitment and onboarding costs. They

The Value of Employee Engagement in the Age of Digital DisruptionAre CFOs Keeping Up With the New Reality?

IN ASSOCIATION WITH:

2 | THE VALUE OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT IN THE AGE OF DIGITAL DISRUPTION: ARE CFOS KEEPING UP WITH THE NEW REALITY?

TABLE OF CONTENTS

3 INTRODUCTION

3 KEY FINDINGS

4 THE HIGH COST OF UNWANTED TURNOVER

9 THE VALUE OF ENGAGEMENT FOR THE CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE

11 ENGAGEMENT IN ACTION: HOW CFOS MEASURE SUCCESS—AND FAILURE

14 CONCLUSION

15 METHODOLOGY

15 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

COPYRIGHT © 2018 FORBES INSIGHTS | 3

INTRODUCTION

Productivity is an easy, clean financial calculation: How many workers or hours does it take to create a certain level of output, revenue or profits? But in the age of digital transformation, as organizations look to enhance and offload human work with AI-enabled technologies, it becomes more important than ever to measure the human values of high performance—creativity, agility, empathy.

With advancing technologies, many organizations are focused more than ever on recruiting—particularly for skills they need to succeed, such as expertise in data science, cybersecurity and artificial intelligence. These hard-to-find and hard-to-hire skills—like so many other skilled professions—cost a lot to recruit. With labor pools shrinking, retaining talent at every level is critical. Recruiting is more expensive than retention, which can be optimized via training or creating a culture of constant learning. Choosing recruitment over retention also has a negative effect on employees, who are left to wonder why their work seems to have less value than that of a new employee.

In this environment, it becomes clear that value lies in the engagement of employees—making sure they are actively contributing to the company while learning new skills and advancing their own careers. But how to measure something as intangible as engagement?

To find out, Forbes Insights together with SilkRoad conducted a survey of 212 U.S.-based CFOs (and equivalents) to explore how financial executives approach and measure the benefits of engagement and the true cost of disengagement.

KEY FINDINGS

KEEPING WANTED EMPLOYEES IS A CHALLENGE, report nearly two-thirds of CFOs.

THE COST OF UNWANTED TURNOVER accounts for 25% to 50% of labor costs for one in four CFOs. One in 10 say it eats up more than 50% of labor costs.

PRIMARY CAUSE OF UNWANTED TURNOVER is poor employee engagement.

INCREASING EMPLOYEE RETENTION THROUGH BETTER ENGAGEMENT has been adopted by one in three organizations.

PRODUCTIVITY IS THE TOP METRIC AND BENEFIT OF ENGAGEMENT. Fifty-one percent use productivity to measure new-hire engagement from a financial perspective, and it is the top benefit of having engaged employees (33%).

THE MOST POPULAR APPROACH TO IMPROVING RETENTION is increasing pay and benefits, followed closely by engaging employees and empowering them to make decisions.

THE FINANCE FUNCTION HAS AN IMPORTANT ROLE TO PLAY in determining how employee onboarding and engagement affect productivity and labor costs, according to 88% of CFOs.


Employee churn is expensive. Replacing and training new employees costs time and money. One in four CFOs say that unwanted turnover accounts for 25% to 50% of labor costs. One in 10 say it eats up more than 50% of labor costs (Figure 1). But the costs don’t stop there. CFOs cite lost productivity, lost sales and additional recruitment and onboarding costs. They are just as concerned about harder-to-measure metrics: diminished customer experience, morale issues and loss of agility to respond to changing markets (Figure 2).

When it comes to hiring and keeping the best talent, these are challenging times for most organizations. Unemployment is falling, exacerbating the talent gap in many fields. Rapidly shifting business and operating models demand an agile workforce at the same time that process automation and artificial intelligence are changing the nature of many occupations. It’s no surprise

that unwanted turnover is a growing problem for most organizations. Nearly two-thirds of CFOs say their firm has a hard time holding on to the employees they want.

The average cos t of hi r ing and t raining a new employee at a large company runs around $100,000, says Tracey Doi, CFO at Toyota Motor North America. For manufacturing jobs that require a level of skill and

THE HIGH COST OF UNWANTED TURNOVER

Figure 1. What percentage of your company’s labor costs are related to unwanted turnover?

None

Less than 10%

Between 10% and 25%

Between 25% and 50%

More than 50%

3%

29%

31%

25%

11%

Note: Does not add to 100% due to rounding

Figure 2. Top costs of unwanted turnover

47%

44%

42%

41%

41%

40%

40%

40%

39%

33%

33%

36%

Increased costs of training replacement employees

Loss of institutional knowledge and customer goodwill

Opportunity cost of not having people in place to respond to changing markets

Additional recruitment costs

Billable employees/sales effectiveness loss

Additional onboarding costs

Potential loss of sales

Change management

Damage to morale and productivity

Decreased customer satisfaction/experience

Lost production costs

Less agility due to unwanted turnover

64% believe retention rates are less than optimal.

lose 10% or more of their new hires within the first year.

57%


THE HIGH-AUTOMATION, HIGH-TURNOVER PARADOX

Firms with higher levels of automation also have much higher levels of unwanted turnover. Nearly a third of highly automated organizations lose more than 50% of their new hires in the first year, and one out of 10 say goodbye to a stunning 75% of their employees in the first year—far higher than at less automated firms. Firms with high turnover are also more likely to be pursuing greater automation. A majority—84%—of high-turnover firms have automated more than 25% of tasks. Only 15% of low-turnover firms have reached that level of automation.

This raises some questions about cause and effect: Are firms that are prone to high turnover automating to overcome labor problems? Or is automation leading to high turnover? One clue: The survey reveals that labor costs play a bigger role in technology decisions for highly automated firms than for less automated firms, supporting the idea that high labor costs may be driving automation at some organizations. Regardless of whether technology and automation can replace human power in a company or industry, neglecting employees in terms of true orientation and acculturation to the company has a consistently negative impact. A high level of unwanted turnover at any organization underscores the need to find new ways to hire wisely, promote engagement and value adaptability.

specialization, the cost is even higher. At that level of investment, the company does everything it can to maintain its low attrition rate—the average tenure is 11 to 12 years—and ensure employees “bring their full self to work every day.”

Doi feels the ef fects of the competitive market in her own field as well. The average tenure for young

accounting and finance professionals in the Dallas/Fort Worth area, where Toyota Motor North America is headquartered, stands at just over two years, says Doi. “I am determined to beat that,” she says. “The idea of having to recruit and train, hire and rehire for the same job is not acceptable.”

W hy d o e m p loye e s l eave? CFO s na me p o o r engagement as the prime cause of unwanted turnover,

Figure 3. What are the top causes of unwanted employee turnover?

23%

21%

21%

20%

20%

20%

19%

18%

18%

13%

12%

15%

15%

17%

11%

Poor employee engagement

Employees do not feel empowered

Disconnected from company leadership

Disconnectedness with leadership

Career tracks not attractive/no mentoring

Company culture

Confusing new-hire period/onboarding

Employees do not understand their purpose (the cog in a wheel syndrome)

Disconnected from company/business unit/team goals

Company not on the cutting edge of new technologies

Company mission not clearly defined

Inadequate payment/benefits

Lack of opportunity to learn new skills/no on-the-job training/education sponsorship

Recruiting and selecting the wrong employees in the first place

Labor shortages


followed by lack of opportunity and inadequate pay (Figure 3). Af ter years of stagnant wage growth, CFOs recognize that increasing pay can help keep employees from leaving. Keeping them happy may not be so easy, however. Many organizations are also trying to improve engagement, empower employees to make decisions, and provide early mentoring and better training opportunities along with higher pay (Figure 4).

Figure 5. Which of these methods are most effective?

30%

24%

22%

22%

18%

15%

15%

14%

14%

13%

13%

8%

Increasing payment/benefits

Improving early mentoring

Being more careful about recruiting in the first place

Improving onboarding

Transforming into a technologically advanced company

Being able to quickly adjust the makeup of the workforce to stay competitive

Improving early career tracks

Defining company mission

Empowering employees to make decisions

Offering on-the-job training/opportunity to learn new skills/education sponsorship

Engaging employees

Customer service

Figure 4. What is your organization currently doing to increase employee retention?

40%

34%

34%

33%

33%

31%

30%

28%

27%

22%

20%

23%

Increasing payment/benefits

Offering on-the-job training/opportunity to learn new skills/education sponsorship

Being more careful about recruiting in the first place

Customer service

Improving onboarding

Defining company mission

Being able to quickly adjust the makeup of the workforce to stay competitive

Transforming into a technologically advanced company


Engaging employees

Improving early mentoring

Improving early career tracks


SOLVING THE TURNOVER MYSTERY: ENGAGEMENT AND OPPORTUNITY

58%

32%

8%

1%

14%

51%

29%

5%

Less than 10%

Between 10% and 25%

Between 25% and 50%

More than 50%

Low-turnover firms High-turnover firms

Figure 6. What percentage of your company’s labor costs are related to unwanted turnover?

Organizations with low turnover take a particularly proactive approach to measuring and promoting engagement at every stage of employment. We have singled out some of their responses here for comparison with high-turnover firms. Low-turnover firms are those where less than 10% of employees leave in the first year. High-turnover firms lose more than 25% in the first year.

First, there is the stark difference in how much labor expenditure goes to productive workers and how much walks out the door, along with all the recruitment and training dollars already spent on them. Eight out of 10 high-turnover firms say that more than a quarter of their company’s labor costs go to unwanted turnover, with three out of 10 saying that employee churn eats up more than half of total labor costs. That is a stark contrast to low-turnover firms, with 90% reporting that unwanted turnover accounts for less than 25% of labor costs.

Low-turnover organizations put far more emphasis on engagement. When asked how they keep employees, CFOs at low-turnover firms say they focus on engagement and opportunity. Why do employees leave in droves at other firms? High-turnover firms blame culture and pay as the top reasons they lose wanted employees (Figure 7).

One quality that stands out among low-turnover firms is the multipronged approach they take to keep employees, with a focus on increasing pay and improving engagement, followed by empowering employees to make decisions and offering better training and early mentoring opportunities (Figure 8).

Nearly all low-turnover firms (92%) have thought through an onboarding process that helps with retention. In contrast, 20% of high-turnover firms do not have an onboarding process.

Figure 7. Why employees leave

28%

23%

23%

21%

21%

21%

21%

22%

Hig

h-tu

rnov

er f

irms

Low

-tur

nove

r firm

s

Disconnect with leadership

Career tracks not attractive

Labor shortage

Employees do not feel empowered

Company culture

Poor engagement

Inadequate pay

Lack of opportunity


90%

85%

85%

85%

89%

68%

75%

66%

66%

66%

Clearly defining goals and performance metrics

Monitoring employee progress

Coaching and monitoring employees for progress

Recognizing and valuing hard work and persistence

Creating a culture of respect

Low-turnover firms High-turnover firms

Figure 9. What is your organization doing to improve engagement?

92%

20%

Nearly all low-turnover firms have thought through an onboarding

process that helps with retention.

In contrast, 20% of high-turnover firms do not have an onboarding process.

36%

Figure 8. What is your organization doing to increase retention?

34%

46%

45%

29%

37%

30%

30%

Hig

h-tu

rnov

er f

irms

Low

-tur

nove

r firm

s

Offering on-the-job training



Offering on-the-job training

Better service

Increasing pay and benefits

Increasing pay and benefits

Engaging employees


Engagement is strongly connected to business outcomes that are essential to an organization’s financial success, including productivity, profitability and customer ratings, according to extensive research conducted by Gallup. “Engaged employees are the ones who are the most likely to drive the innovation, growth and revenue that their companies desperately need. These engaged workers build new products and services, generate new ideas, create new customers

and ultimately help spur the economy to create more good jobs,” according to Gallup.

CFOs clearly recognize the value of an engaged workforce to the present and future success of the enterprise. They see a strong connection between having the right skills in place in an engaged workforce and reaching key strategic goals of growth, profitability and creating a better customer experience. These

THE VALUE OF ENGAGEMENT FOR THE CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE

Figure 10. What are the top strategic goals of your organization?

47%

41%

35%

25%

17%

16%

16%

24%

19%

15%

14%

Increasing revenue growth

Digital transformation

Creating new business models

Increasing employee satisfaction/experience

International expansion

Creating new distribution networks

Fostering innovation

Increasing customer satisfaction/experience

Increasing profitability

Adding new products and services

Domestic expansion

Figure 11. What are the top factors that will decide whether your organization’s goals are going to be met?

39%

35%

31%

29%

22%

20%

20%

28%

26%

26%

Having a clear vision/strategy

Making the right technology investments

Agility/speed to market

Ability to execute/operating model

Making the right workforce investments

Partnering with the right organizations/startups

Ability to innovate

Customer retention and growth

Having the right skills in place

Having an engaged workforce


strategic goals form the basis for how CFOs assess workforce performance and value (Figure 10).

Customer satisfaction stands out in particular. It is one of the top three strategic goals named by CFOs. Customer retention and growth is one of the top three factors that will decide whether those goals are met (Figure 11). And CFOs recognize that happy customers are the greatest measure of workforce performance and value (Figure 12). Ultimately, all of the other top workforce measures—revenue growth, innovation and product quality—relate to creating a product or service that customers want, need and appreciate.

There is strong evidence of the link between employee and customer satisfaction. Forbes Insights research reveals leaders in customer engagement are four times more likely to be experiencing growth of more than 10% and are three times more likely to be in the top quartile in Net Promoter Score, which measures customers’ willingness to recommend a company’s products or services to others.

The effects that disengaged employees have on customer experience are among the most overlooked in all companies, according to “Why CFOs Should Care About Customer Experience—What They Need to Understand About Its Impact on Revenue, Retention and Brand Image,” an article on business2community.com. “Engaged employees directly affect the experience of the customer, and very often the first impression of a potential customer.” CFOs may not see the relevance of employee engagement, but they will see the impact on revenue.

Figure 12. Top measures CFOs use to assess workforce performance and value

44%

39%

37%

37%

29%

29%

23%

19%

33%

15%

17%

17%

12%

Customer satisfaction

Engagement

Retention rates

Level of innovation

Labor cost per unit of output

Peer evaluations

NPS (Net Promoter Score)

Output per employee

Absenteeism

Revenue growth

Teamwork

Products/service quality

Manager evaluations


“Human capital may be the biggest asset at many organizations, but measuring the value of each employee is not a straightforward financial calculation. Experience has shown us that an engaged and productive workforce has a significant impact on a company’s performance. While this is not as a balance sheet asset, there are ways to measure, indirectly, the value of an engaged, productive workforce,” says Richard Clark, chief accounting officer and corporate controller at Accenture, the global professional services company.

Having an engaged workforce is one of the top 10 factors in meeting strategic goals. But keeping employees engaged is an ongoing effort. Only four in 10 CFOs believe that 75% or more of their workforce is truly engaged. And only one in three organizations aim to increase employee retention through better engagement.

How do you measure whether employees are engaged? Regular surveys may be the way that most organizations carry this out, as a means to give employees a voice.

Seventy-two percent of CFOs say their organization asks employees about job satisfaction through surveys. But many CFOs do not trust the data they see related to engagement and exit surveys. Only 28% of CFOs rely on engagement survey results. And just under half say they understand and can measure the true causes behind unwanted turnover extremely well (Figure 14).

CFOs struggling to understand why employees leave see another telling impediment: A third of them believe their leadership is not interested in finding the true causes.

ENGAGEMENT IN ACTION: HOW CFOS MEASURE SUCCESS—AND FAILURE

Figure 13. What is your best estimate about how many of the employees in your organization are truly engaged? (Truly engaged is defined as employees who are on board with the organization’s goals and actively promote them; enjoy their work and the ability to improve their skills; and see them-selves as long-term contributors to an organization: They help create a good working environment.)

Less than 25%

Between 25% and 50%

Between 50% and 75%

Between 75% and 90%

More than 90%

Don’t know

1%

7%

19%

32%

31%

10%

Figure 14. Top reasons it’s difficult to understand and measure the true causes behind unwanted employee turnover

44%

33%

31%

31%

17%

17%

17%

22%

25%

14%

Quality of data questionable (employees may not disclose true reasons)

Many of the causes cannot be quantified

Lack of external data to fully understand the issue

Data is in silos

Difficulties analyzing available data and drawing actionable insights

Not a priority for the finance department

Lack of cooperation between finance and HR

Lack of interest from leadership to find the true causes

Lack of understanding of the importance of knowing the true causes

Lack of internal data to fully understand the issue


Even though some CFOs are clearly indicating that disengagement is a symptom of larger problems at their organization, the overwhelming majority (88%) believe the finance function has an important role to play in determining how employee onboarding and engagement affect productivity and labor costs. And 83% believe the finance function is up to speed on efforts to keep employees engaged. For those who do say the finance

function has a lack of awareness, it’s mainly caused by a lack of cooperation between HR and finance, say 44%.At Toyota Motor North America, the HR function provides data to help every area of the business. “But engagement can’t be an HR-led effort,” says Doi. Most of the company’s engagement efforts have very long-term horizons, and they tend to be bottom-up. The bottom-up approach applies to empowering employees to make technology

THE BOTTOM LINE: ENGAGED EMPLOYEES ARE MORE PRODUCTIVE

For CFOs, productivity is the preferred way to monitor and measure new-hire engagement from a financial perspective. They also name productivity as the top benefit of having engaged employees (Figures 15 and 16).

Figure 15. How do you monitor and measure new-hire engagement?

51%

27%

27%

25%

28%

38%

24%

34%

26%

26%

23%

Revenue growth

Number of suggested ideas for improvement/innovation initiatives

Diligence (e.g., absenteeism)

An engagement survey (self-assessment)

Ratio of highly engaged employees on different teams

Productivity

Building a broad network of connections across the whole enterprise

Participation in extracurricular activities (outings, charity works)

Participation in training

Participation in meetings that seem out of scope for a given employee

Number of promotions/commendations

Figure 16. Top benefits of having engaged employees

33%

24%

23%

25%

29%

19%

27%

21%

20%

20%

18%

14%

Higher employee loyalty

Having necessary skills in place

Ability to successful introduce transformative technologies

Easier to recruit new employees

Increased customer satisfaction

Higher retention/lower turnover

Higher productivity

Increased profitability

Increased agility/ability to stay competitive

Better teamwork

Increased revenue

Better company reputation


decisions as well, with finance, IT, HR and other functions as enablers. For Doi, the ROI on engagement initiatives comes in the form of low attrition, better customer support and more efficiency across functions.

What gets measured gets done. However, not many finance executives are tracking common measures that could give better insight into the true cost of disengagement. Only a third monitor the talent-management-related cost of specif ic functions, recruitment versus retention costs, and time to full productivity due to onboarding. One finding is particularly telling: Nearly all CFOs—92%—believe that proper onboarding could decrease or eliminate the heavy costs associated with unwanted turnover. Yet only 27% say their organization is improving onboarding to help retain employees.

In their quest to measure engagement, CFOs can leverage technology. “Automation and cognitive capabilities are changing how we work, allowing CFOs to dramatically reinvent how finance professionals impact the bottom line. Individuals will be able to invest their time on activities that drive more value to the organization, resulting in higher levels of engagement,” points out Accenture’s Clark. This applies to measuring—and fostering—engagement as well. “The next wave of engagement is thinking about how we enable the individual. How do we create an environment where individuals can architect better engagement for themselves?” he asks. “Intelligent technologies are enabling this space to evolve very quickly.”

Figure 17. Which of the following costs associated with talent management are you currently tracking?

34%

34%

33%

33%

29%

24%

32%

32%

We are tracking talent-management-related cost of specific functions

Time/materials spent on onboarding/ processing new employees (by HR)

ROI on proper onboarding

ROI on training provided to employees

Time to full productivity due to onboarding

Recruitment versus retention

We are tracking talent-management-related costs across the enterprise

ROI on higher employee retention

92% 27%believe proper onboarding

could decrease costs associated with unwanted turnover.

Yet only 27% are improving onboarding to increase retention.


Hiring—and keeping—the best talent is crucial for achieving financial and strategic goals. Controlling labor costs, while at the same time making sure that the company’s goals are being met, ultimately falls on the CFO.

It is clear that CFOs recognize the value of an engaged workforce—and the cost of disengagement—at a time of breathtaking change in business models, enterprise structures and entire occupations. They also recognize that the financial function has an important role to play in determining how employee onboarding and engagement affect productivity and labor costs. However, there is a disconnect between realizing where productivity is lost through disengaged employees and working with the HR department to change how the organization onboards. Through strategic onboarding—going beyond transactional forms to meaningful orientation and ongoing acculturation—CFOs may start to see their productivity and customer retention increase, along with a decrease in turnover rates among employees.

Successful CFOs recognize that:

• THE COST OF UNWANTED TURNOVER IS TOO HIGH, AND RETENTION RATES ARE LESS THAN OPTIMAL, PUSHING UP LABOR COSTS. This issue is becoming even more acute as the unemployment rate is falling and companies need specific skills to stay competitive.

• POOR EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT IS THE TOP CAUSE OF UNWANTED EMPLOYEE TURNOVER, and improving employee engagement, along with increasing pay and benefits, is the most effective

way to keep unwanted turnover in check. Low-turnover companies pay much more attention to employee engagement than high-turnover ones.

• THE AGE OF AUTOMATION MAY LEAD TO HIGHER UNWANTED TURNOVER, further escalating labor costs. Companies need to find new ways to keep employees engaged and working alongside technology.

• EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT IS ONE OF THE TOP FACTORS IN RAISING PRODUCTIVITY, achieving strategic goals and customer satisfaction. Yet few CFOs believe that a majority of their workforce is engaged.

• TRADITIONAL METRICS TO MEASURE UNWANTED EMPLOYEE TURNOVER ARE NOT ADEQUATE TO MEASURE ENGAGEMENT. CFOs can leverage data-driven technologies for a more precise measurement of employee engagement.

• ONBOARDING CAN DECREASE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH UNWANTED TURNOVER, and a more thorough and thoughtful onboarding process should play a bigger role to improve retention and keep labor costs down.

CONCLUSION


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

METHODOLOGY

Forbes Insights and SilkRoad would like to thank the following individuals for their time and expertise:

• Richard Clark, Chief Accounting Officer and Corporate Controller, Accenture

• Tracey Doi, CFO, Toyota Motor North America

The data in this report is based on a survey conducted in August and September of 2018 of 212 executives in the United States who are the senior-most official for the finance function in their organization. Respondents came from a range of industries, including: manufacturing, resources and construction (15%), retail (14%), financial markets (11%), telecommunications (9%), healthcare (9%), banking (8%) and transportation (5%). All organizations had annual revenue greater than $500 million; 61% had revenue greater than $1 billion. Forty-four percent of organizations have 5,000 or more employees.

212executives in the United States

INDUSTRIES

15%

14%

11%

29%

9%8%

5%

9%

Manufacturing, resources and construction

Retail

Financial markets

Other

Healthcare

Banking

Transportation

Telecommunications


ABOUT FORBES INSIGHTS

Forbes Insights is the strategic research and thought leadership practice of Forbes Media, a global media, branding and technology company whose combined platforms reach nearly 94 million business decision makers worldwide on a monthly basis. By leveraging proprietary databases of senior-level executives in the Forbes community, Forbes Insights conducts research on a wide range of topics to position brands as thought leaders and drive stakeholder engagement. Research findings are delivered through a variety of digital, print and live executions, and amplified across Forbes’ social and media platforms.

499 Washington Blvd. Jersey City, NJ 07310 | 212.367.2662 | https://forbes.com/forbes-insights/

EDITORIAL & RESEARCH

Erika Maguire EXECUTIVE EDITORIAL DIRECTOR

Kasia Wandycz Moreno EDITORIAL DIRECTOR

Hugo S. Moreno EDITORIAL DIRECTOR

Ross Gagnon RESEARCH DIRECTOR

Scott McGrath RESEARCH ANALYST

Deborah Orr REPORT AUTHOR

Zehava Pasternak DESIGNER

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

Casey Zonfrilli DIRECTOR, ACCOUNT MANAGEMENT

Tori Kreher PROJECT MANAGER

Brian Lee PROJECT MANAGER

Todd Della Rocca PROJECT MANAGER

SALES

North America Brian McLeod VICE PRESIDENT

[email protected]

Matthew Muszala EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

[email protected]

William Thompson DIRECTOR

[email protected]

Kimberly Kurata MANAGER

[email protected]

Europe Charles Yardley SVP MANAGING DIRECTOR

[email protected]

Asia Will Adamopoulos PRESIDENT & PUBLISHER, FORBES ASIA [email protected]

Documents

The Value of Employee Engagement in the Age of Digital …info.forbes.com/rs/790-SNV-353/images/Silkroad_REPORT... · 2020-02-23 · additional recruitment and onboarding costs. They