Gallup Says Employee Engagement Is ‘On The Brink’ – But Is That the Full Picture?

The field of employee engagement research has changed a lot during my entire 26-year career as a consultant in the space. The role of technology in the workplace has dramatically altered most workplaces, but in other respects, some things haven’t changed much at all. 

One constant has been a rigorous debate about how to define employee engagement – including what it is in practice and how to measure it accurately.  

Gallup has done a huge amount to promote the role of listening to employee sentiment, and its research, in particular its annual State of The Global Workplace report, has been instrumental to furthering the profession I love so much. 

But there’s something that has never sat well with myself and many other practitioners in this space. 

When I read headlines like ‘Employee Engagement on the Brink’, I pause – not because the data isn’t important, but because context matters. Throughout my time in this field, I’ve seen how data points can vary widely depending on how you define and measure engagement.

For instance, Gallup’s 2025 report states “in 2024, the global percentage of engaged employees fell from 23% to 21%.” But context is important. Here’s why: 

• 21% global engagement doesn’t align with research produced by other established employee engagement researchers.
• Like the stock markets, employee engagement rises and falls throughout and over the years. In fact, Gallup’s 21% is still nearly double the 12% they measured in 2009 – a number which has risen nearly every year since then (until Covid-19 and now). Any dip is noteworthy, of course, but it’s hardly “at breaking point”.

It's important to note that while Gallup's figure may reflect certain aspects of engagement, other organizations report significantly and consistently higher engagement levels globally:​

Microsoft: 75% as of December 31, 2023.

Culture Amp: 71% in 2024, returning to pre-pandemic levels.

Perceptyx: 79.3%, with regional variations – Europe at 75.6% and South America leading at 84.6%.

So why the 50-plus percentage point discrepancy? 

In short, it’s all about the definition and measurement of engagement. It’s well known in research circles that different methodologies can yield vastly different results – not because one is wrong, but because they’re often measuring different things. In this case, confusion often arises as a result of those different things having identical labels. That’s why Gallup’s 21% global ‘engagement’ figure can coexist with other organizations’ ‘engagement’ numbers in the 70% to 80% range. 

The Gallup Q12™ survey takes a specific and well-established approach, focusing primarily on the emotional and immediate aspects of employee experience. While this is a valuable lens, it’s one of several. Other models – including those grounded in organizational psychology – tend to take a broader view that also encompasses cognitive and behavioral dimensions.​

1. Overemphasis on the ‘here-and-now’ instead of the bigger picture

One critique of the Q12™ is that it predominantly measures employees’ feelings rather than their behaviors or attitudes. For instance, questions about recognition, feeling cared for, and having a best friend at work focus on emotional responses. They are valid topics to measure, but it’s important to zoom out, too. Only a few items address what employees actually do, such as having the necessary materials or doing what they do best, and none focus on bigger-picture topics, such as strategy, culture, communication, or leadership.

2. Different definition of engagement

Most models of engagement encompass cognitive, emotional, and behavioral components. Gallup’s focus on emotional and near-field operational aspects may neglect other commonly accepted aspects of employee engagement, such as pride, belonging, optimism, or employee advocacy.

Gallup has undeniably helped sustain awareness around employee engagement and listening, but as our understanding of work evolves, so too must our frameworks for understanding engagement.

Capturing the full spectrum of engagement

I’m of the belief that organizations should consider frameworks that capture the full spectrum of engagement, including cognitive and behavioral dimensions, as well as a broader range of what drives employees to engage. 

​Workvivo by Zoom offers a comprehensive approach to measuring employee engagement through its Employee Insights suite, which is designed to provide organizations with actionable insights into employee engagement levels. 

Workvivo’s engagement model has been developed in collaboration with organizational psychologists and HR leaders, and assesses engagement across a range of key topic groups, including well-being, culture and values, career development, communication, leadership, productivity, and more. 

This approach to measuring employee engagement is holistic, combining scientifically developed models with integrated tools that not only assess engagement levels but also provide actionable insights to foster a more engaged and productive workforce.