CEB HR Employee Engagement Best Western (October 2016) BW: Rachel - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

CEB HR Employee Engagement Best Western (October 2016) BW: Rachel Aus9n, Managing Director, HR CEB: Nicholas Solebello, Research Consultant, PhD

CEB HR Employee Engagement Report CEB HR Employee Engagement Agenda 1. Welcome and Introduc9ons 2. Engagement Capital Overview 3. Data Interpreta9on 4. Results Overview 5. PlaMorm Training 6. Closing Thoughts and Q&A

Engagement Capital Overview CEB HR Employee Engagement CEB HR ’ s Temporal Measurement of Engagement: CEB HR’s measure of engagement evaluates Engagement Capital™ employees’ temporal commitment. 1 Sample Ques9ons • Respondents provided feedback regarding their percep@ons of employment PAST EVENTS PRESENT EXPERIENCES FUTURE EXPECTATIONS events over the past two years, their current aMtudes about day-to-day experiences, and their expecta@ons My organiza@on has consistently I enjoy working on my day to day I am confident about the future regarding future experiences at the organiza@on. treated me well. tasks and assignments. performance of my organiza@on. I trust my organiza@on. I look forward to going to work. I am confident I will have a successful career at my organiza@on. 1 Please see the Appendix for a full list of questions.

Engagement Capital Overview CEB HR Employee Engagement CEB HR’s Model of Engagement Engagement capital refers to the amount of commitment, discre9onary effort, and intent to stay that employees exhibit given the combina9on of their past events, present expecta9ons, and expecta9ons about the future. CEB HR has also iden9fied the best-in-class drivers of engagement which affect engagement capital and ul9mately drive organiza9onal performance. Examples of Engagement Capital Talent Outcomes Engagement Drivers Organiza9onal Performance Past Events Past Events • Manager Quality Employees’ emo@onal and ra@onal commitment Employees’ emo@onal and ra@onal commitment based on their percep@on of previous events with based on their percep@on of previous events with Discre9onary Effort/ their employer their employer • Culture/Values Performance • Revenue • Career/ Present Experiences Performance • Profit Management Commitment Employees’ emo@onal and ra@onal commitment based on their percep@on of present experiences • Customer Sa9sfac9on • Compensa9on & Rewards Intent to Stay/ Future Expecta9ons Reten9on Employees’ emo@onal and ra@onal commitment • Work based on their expecta@ons of their future Environment employment experience

Data Interpreta@on CEB HR Employee Engagement Interpre9ng the Results Scores: Throughout this presenta@on, scores are presented as percent favorable, neutral and unfavorable based on the combina@on of responses across the 7-point scale. Employees who responded posi@vely – answering “ strongly agree ” and Percent Favorable 6 or 7 “ agree. ” Employees who responded in the middle/neutral - answering Percent Neutral 3, 4, or 5 “ somewhat agree, ” “ neither agree nor disagree, ” or “ somewhat disagree. ” Employees who responded nega@vely – answering “ strongly disagree ” Percent Unfavorable 1 or 2 and “ disagree. ” Categories: Categories are summa@ons of individual ques@on items grouped together by theme. Individual items within a category can vary and some@mes one item in par@cular is pulling the category score up or down. Results in this presenta@on can be viewed by category and individual item. External Benchmarks: Benchmarks are based on all of the members that have launched this survey in the past two years. Provided in this summary are comparisons to our Global benchmark which includes: a. An overall average of all organiza@ons across industry and geography b. 400+ mid-sized organiza@ons and over 400,000 individual par@cipants Confiden9ality: CEB will not report results for any demographic group when less than 7 employees responded to the survey with a given set of demographic characteris@cs.

Data Interpreta@on CEB HR Employee Engagement Interpre9ng the Results (cont’d.) Intent to Stay: Our intent to stay ques@ons are reverse scaled. This means that the ques@ons are worded in a way that strongly disagree and disagree are the more favorable responses to this ques@on. For example, when reading the ques@on “I am ac@vely looking for a job with another organiza@on”, the top two/favorable responses mean that the par@cipants are NOT ac@vely looking for another job. Something to keep in mind is that the green bars will always represent a favorable outcome for the organiza@on. You will note that the word “[not]” is included in the ques@on item to make this clear. Year over Year Scores: If you have par@cipated in the CEB HR Employee Engagement Survey before, you will have a Year over Year (YoY) trending page in your report. The YoY change is calculated using a percentage change formula (current year score – previous year score / previous year score). This provides you with an understanding of the YoY change in reference to the original (previous year) value.

Best Western 2016 Engagement Survey Total Company Total Invited ........................................................... 1,352 Number Responding ........................................................... 1,264 Response Rate ........................................................... 93% Survey Administration: 8/23/2016 - 9/14/2016

Execu@ve Summary CEB HR Employee Engagement Overview of Engagement Capital at Best Western Employee Engagement Metrics Engagement Capital Score The Engagement Capital score is the average of the Engagement Capital The index metrics below allow you to iden@fy areas of strength and areas Past, Present, and Future ques@ons. This metric is designed to give you for improvement across the en@re organiza@on. Percent Favorable in this an overall score of the amount of commitment, discre@onary effort, and report refers to the percentage of employees who scored primarily sixes or intent to stay that employees exhibit. sevens, or strongly agree and agree. Percent Favorable Overall Score Best Western Benchmark Engagement Capital 74% (n=1,264) 60% (n=394,680) Percent Favorable Engagement Metric Best Western Benchmark Top Engagement Gaps Engagement Capital (Past) 77% (n=1,264) 62% (n=394,221) Engagement Capital (Present) 76% (n=1,264) 66% (n=394,911) The Top Engagement Gaps refer to your two lowest engagement scores in reference to the benchmark. Engagement Capital (Future) 71% (n=1,264) 52% (n=394,909) Difference From Discretionary Effort 90% (n=1,264) 86% (n=392,145) Engagement Metric Best Western Benchmark Intent to Stay 71% (n=1,264) 67% (n=394,147) Intent to Stay 71% (n=1,264) 4% Employee Commitment 72% (n=1,264) 56% (n=150,799) Discretionary Effort 90% (n=1,264) 4% Culture/Values 79% (n=1,264) 67% (n=122,402) Work Environment 68% (n=1,264) 49% (n=202,449) Manager 75% (n=1,264) 57% (n=194,890) Top Engagement Strengths Career/Performance 73% (n=1,264) 57% (n=236,901) The Top Engagement Strengths refer to your two highest engagement Compensation & Rewards 53% (n=1,264) 41% (n=160,413) scores in reference to the benchmark. Communication 59% (n=1,264) 39% (n=138,540) Difference From Engagement Metric Best Western The benchmark values reported are averages of all responses globally for each question Benchmark included in the survey. The global benchmark is made up of over 400 like-sized Communication 59% (n=1,264) 20% organizations from over 20 industries. Work Environment 68% (n=1,264) 19%

Execu@ve Summary – Year on Year Trending CEB HR Employee Engagement Understanding YoY Differences Percent Favorable To the right you will see the Overall Score Benchmark Best Western - 2016 Best Western - 2015 YoY Change scores for the benchmark, your Engagement Capital 60% (n=394,680) 74% (n=1,264) 75% (n=1,270) -1% current survey data, and the most recent previous year’s survey data. The right-most column includes a percentage change calcula@on. A Percent Favorable percentage change score is not as simple as subtrac@ng the Engagement Metric Benchmark Best Western - 2016 Best Western - 2015 YoY Change current year’s and previous year’s data. The YoY change is 62% (n=394,221) 77% (n=1,264) 77% (n=1,270) 0% Engagement Capital (Past) calculated using a percentage 66% (n=394,911) 76% (n=1,264) 76% (n=1,270) -1% Engagement Capital (Present) change formula (current year 52% (n=394,909) 71% (n=1,264) 72% (n=1,270) -2% Engagement Capital (Future) score minus previous year score, 86% (n=392,145) 90% (n=1,264) 90% (n=1,270) 0% Discretionary Effort divided by previous year score). This provides you with an 67% (n=394,147) 71% (n=1,264) 72% (n=1,270) -2% Intent to Stay understanding of the YoY change 56% (n=150,799) 72% (n=1,264) 74% (n=1,270) -2% Employee Commitment in reference to the original 67% (n=122,402) 79% (n=1,264) 80% (n=1,270) -1% Culture/Values (previous year’s) value. 49% (n=202,449) 68% (n=1,264) 69% (n=1,270) -1% Work Environment 57% (n=194,890) 75% (n=1,264) 75% (n=1,270) 0% Manager All numbers are posi@ve unless 57% (n=236,901) 73% (n=1,264) 74% (n=1,270) -1% Career/Performance denoted by a “-” symbol. 41% (n=160,413) 53% (n=1,264) 52% (n=1,270) 2% Compensation & Rewards 39% (n=138,540) 59% (n=1,264) 60% (n=1,270) -2% Communication The benchmark values reported are averages of all responses globally for each question included in the survey. The global benchmark is made up of over 400 like-sized organizations from over 20 industries.

[Move to platform for deep dive of results]