Last Updated:3 September 2026
Quick answer: The employee engagement strategies with the strongest evidence behind them are: clear communication and expectations, manager capability, consistent recognition, structured growth and mentoring, psychological safety, wellbeing support, flexible work, strong onboarding, peer connection, and autonomy. None of these work in isolation. Gallup's 2026 research found team engagement is driven more by manager quality than by any single perk or program, so engagement strategies succeed or fail largely on how well managers are equipped to run them, not on how many initiatives HR launches.
Global employee engagement fell to 20% in 2025, the lowest level since 2020 and the second year in a row it has dropped, according to Gallup's State of the Global Workplace: 2026 Report. In Australia and New Zealand, engagement sits at 21%, roughly in line with the global figure, while 66% of employees in the region are "not engaged" and 13% are "actively disengaged." For most Australian organisations, that means fewer than one in four people are genuinely invested in their work on any given day.
This guide sets out the employee engagement and retention strategies with the strongest evidence behind them, how mentoring fits into that mix, which tools actually help you run them, and how to measure whether any of it is working.
Employee engagement in Australia and New Zealand sits at 21%, barely above the global average of 20%, the lowest either figure has been since 2020. The strategies with real evidence behind them, clear communication, manager capability, consistent recognition, structured growth and mentoring, psychological safety, wellbeing support, flexible work, strong onboarding, peer connection, and autonomy, only work when managers are equipped to run them. Gallup's research is unambiguous that manager quality explains more of the variance in team engagement than any single program or perk, and manager engagement itself has fallen faster than individual-contributor engagement over the past three years.
Mentoring is one of the few interventions that touches several of these drivers at once: development, onboarding support, peer connection, and (done well) psychological safety. The Manufacturing Skills Queensland Women in Trades program is one example of what structured, values-based mentoring looks like at scale, matching 129 mentees with 91 mentors across two years and five cohorts. This guide sets out the strategies with the strongest evidence behind them, how mentoring fits into that mix, which tools actually help, and how to tell whether any of it is working.
Employee engagement is the level of psychological attachment an employee has to their work, their team and their employer. It shows up as discretionary effort: an engaged employee does more than the job description asks, not because they're told to, but because they're invested in the outcome.
Gallup categorises employees into three groups:
Engagement is closely related to, but distinct from, job satisfaction. An employee can be satisfied with their pay and conditions while still being disengaged from the actual work.
Engagement has been sliding globally for two consecutive years, driven largely by a drop in manager engagement rather than a drop among individual contributors. Manager engagement fell from 27% in 2024 to 22% in 2025, continuing a decline from 31% in 2022. Best-practice organisations still manage to keep 79% of their managers engaged, nearly four times the global average, which suggests the gap is a management and support problem rather than an inevitable trend.
| Region | Engaged | Not Engaged | Actively Disengaged |
|---|---|---|---|
| Global average | 20% | – | – |
| Australia and New Zealand | 21% | 66% | 13% |
| United States and Canada | 31% | 52% | 17% |
| Europe | 12% | 73% | 15% |
Source: Gallup, State of the Global Workplace: 2026 Report – Regional Data, data collected January–December 2025.
The business case for closing that gap is well established. Gallup's Q12 meta-analysis (11th edition), which compares top-quartile and bottom-quartile business units across 183,806 teams, found that highly engaged teams see:
Globally, Gallup estimates that low engagement cost the world economy approximately $10 trillion in lost productivity in 2025 alone, or around 9% of global GDP. That's not a soft number attached to a soft problem; it's a productivity and retention issue with a very real line item attached.
These are the strategies for employee engagement that show up consistently in the research, not just in vendor marketing. They're ordered roughly by how foundational they are; the first few need to be in place before the later ones will land.
Before adding any new initiative, find out where engagement actually stands. Guessing wastes budget on the wrong fix. A short, validated survey (Gallup's Q12 items are the industry benchmark) gives you a defensible baseline and a way to track whether anything you do afterwards actually moves the needle. We cover exactly how to do this properly further down, in how to measure the effectiveness of employee engagement platforms.
Gallup's research is unambiguous on this point: the quality of a person's direct manager explains a large share of the variance in team engagement, more than any other single factor. Yet manager engagement itself has fallen further and faster than individual-contributor engagement over the past three years.
Practically, this means investing in manager training on:
An organisation that puts one new engagement program in place but does nothing to lift manager capability is, in effect, asking disengaged managers to carry an engagement strategy they don't yet have the skills for.
Employees disengage quietly when they feel like decisions happen to them rather than with them. Two-way communication means employees have a real channel to raise concerns and ideas, and, just as importantly, see evidence that the feedback changed something. A survey nobody hears back from teaches people that feedback doesn't matter, which is worse for engagement than not asking at all.
This can be as simple as: closing the loop on survey results within a set timeframe, holding regular team forums where questions get answered live, and being transparent about which suggestions were and weren't actioned, and why.
Recognition works best when it's specific, frequent and tied to something real, not generic praise handed out on a schedule. Employees who feel appreciated are considerably more likely to stay engaged with their work; the reverse is also true, and a lack of recognition is one of the more common reasons people quietly start job hunting.
Effective recognition programs tend to share three features: they're peer-to-peer as well as top-down, they're specific about what was done well, and they happen close to the moment the work occurred rather than being batched into an annual awards night.
Employees who can see a credible path forward, whether that's a promotion, a lateral move, or simply visible skill growth, are far more likely to stay engaged than those who feel stuck. This is one of the areas where a single initiative can address several drivers of disengagement at once: development, connection and a sense of being invested in.
Structured mentoring is one of the more cost-effective ways to deliver this. It gives employees regular, dedicated time with someone invested in their growth, and it does double duty as a retention lever, since 98% of US Fortune 500 firms now run some form of corporate mentoring program.
Real example: Manufacturing Skills Queensland (MSQ) partnered with Brancher to deliver its Women in Trades Mentoring Program, pairing female apprentices and early-career tradeswomen with experienced mentors using values-based matching, structured training and a live workshop series. Across two years and five cohorts, the program matched 129 mentees with 91 mentors, comfortably exceeding its contracted target, in a sector where women remain a clear minority. The program combined structured workshops with one-on-one mentoring to give apprentices language and confidence to navigate a male-dominated industry, and MSQ has used two years of program data to shape the next phase.
We go into more detail on how mentoring specifically supports engagement further down.
Gallup research shows employees who describe their onboarding as "exceptional" are 2.6 times more likely to be extremely satisfied with their workplace, and when a manager takes an active role in onboarding, new hires are 3.4 times more likely to say the process succeeded. Gallup's own analysis suggests new employees typically take around 12 months to reach full performance potential, so onboarding is better thought of as a year-long process than a first-week checklist.
A structured 30/60/90-day plan, an assigned buddy or mentor from day one, and clear early wins do more for long-term engagement than a polished slide deck on the first day.
Google's internal Project Aristotle research, which studied 180 teams across engineering and sales, found psychological safety was the single strongest predictor of team effectiveness, ahead of team composition, seniority or even individual performance. Psychological safety is the shared belief that it's safe to take an interpersonal risk on a team: to ask a question, admit a mistake, or challenge an idea without being punished for it socially.
Leaders build this by modelling their own fallibility, actively inviting dissenting views, and responding to mistakes with curiosity rather than blame. Teams with low psychological safety tend to look "fine" on the surface while quietly under-reporting real problems, which makes it one of the harder engagement drivers to spot through a survey alone.
Engagement and wellbeing move together. In Australia and New Zealand, 55% of employees report they're "thriving" in life overall, the highest of any measure in the region, yet engagement still sits at just 21%, which suggests people can be doing reasonably well in life generally while still being disengaged at work specifically. That gap is worth paying attention to.
Wellbeing support that actually moves engagement tends to go beyond a standard health plan: access to mental health resources or an Employee Assistance Program, some flexibility around financial wellbeing, and a workplace culture that treats mental health days as a normal part of managing workload, not an exception that needs justifying.
Burnout is the direct opposite of engagement, and it's largely preventable. Employees who feel their personal life is respected, not just tolerated, are considerably less likely to disengage or leave. In the Australia/New Zealand region, 49% of employees report significant daily stress, so this isn't a theoretical concern for local employers.
Flexible arrangements, genuine (not nominal) time-off policies, and managers who model taking leave rather than just approving it, all contribute here.
Gallup's research has consistently found that employees with a close friend at work are far more engaged than those without one, and the effect is large enough that Gallup treats it as one of its core Q12 engagement items. Connection rarely happens by accident, particularly in hybrid teams, so it's worth engineering deliberately: peer mentoring, cross-team project rotations, structured group check-ins, or informal interest-based groups.
Micromanagement is one of the fastest ways to disengage a capable employee. Autonomy doesn't mean removing direction, it means giving people meaningful say in how they meet their goals, not just what the goals are. This might look like flexible scheduling, room to try a different approach without pre-approval for every step, or genuine input into team objectives.
Software can make every strategy above easier to run consistently and harder to let slip, but only if it's chosen to solve a specific problem rather than adopted because it's what everyone else uses. We cover this in detail in the next two sections.
Quick answer: There's no single best tool, because "employee engagement software" actually spans several distinct categories that solve different problems: pulse survey and engagement analytics platforms (for measuring sentiment), recognition and rewards platforms (for reinforcing good work), internal communication tools (for two-way dialogue), and structured mentoring and connection platforms (for development, retention and belonging). Most organisations with a mature engagement strategy end up running two or three of these categories together, rather than expecting one tool to cover all of it.
Here's how the categories map to the strategies above:
| Category | What it solves | Which strategies it supports |
|---|---|---|
| Pulse survey and analytics platforms | Ongoing sentiment measurement, eNPS tracking, benchmarking over time | Baseline measurement, two-way communication |
| Recognition and rewards platforms | Peer-to-peer and manager recognition, milestone tracking | Recognition, culture |
| Internal communication tools | Company-wide updates, feedback channels, town halls | Two-way communication, transparency |
| Structured mentoring and connection platforms | Values or personality-based matching, structured training, progress tracking, group mentoring | Growth pathways, onboarding, peer connection, psychological safety |
For the mentoring and connection category specifically, the choice of tool matters more than it might seem, because a poor match does more damage to engagement than no formal program at all. Brancher is built around personality and values-based matching rather than matching on skills or availability alone, on the reasoning that a mentee and mentor who share compatible values and working styles build trust faster and stay paired for longer than a match based on job title alone.
The platform also handles the administrative load that tends to sink informal mentoring programs: automated matching, structured training content for mentors and mentees, meeting scheduling with calendar integrations, and dashboards that track program-level engagement rather than relying on anecdote.
What to look for when choosing any engagement platform, regardless of category:
Quick answer: Measure engagement platforms on two layers: leading indicators (survey participation rate, eNPS, engagement index scores) that tell you how people feel now, and lagging indicators (voluntary turnover, absenteeism, internal mobility, productivity) that tell you whether that sentiment is translating into real business outcomes. A platform is only working if movement in the leading indicators eventually shows up in the lagging ones; if scores improve but turnover and absenteeism don't budge over a couple of quarters, treat that as a signal to dig into why, not a reason to add another initiative on top.
This approach mirrors how Gallup itself calculates the economic cost of disengagement: connecting a validated engagement measure to real productivity and retention data, rather than treating a survey score as the end point.
Mentoring shows up repeatedly in the strategies above because it's one of the few interventions that addresses several drivers of disengagement at once: it delivers development (strategy 5), it strengthens onboarding when paired with new hires (strategy 6), it builds peer connection (strategy 10), and done well, it reinforces psychological safety by giving employees a confidential, judgement-light space to raise concerns (strategy 7).
The mechanism matters more than the fact of having "a mentoring program." A structured program with clear goals and genuine matching does the work that an informal "ask your manager to introduce you to someone senior" arrangement generally doesn't, because informal arrangements tend to default to whoever's available rather than whoever's actually a good fit. That's the gap values and personality-based matching is designed to close: it evaluates a mentee and mentor on compatibility of working style and values, not just seniority or skills overlap, and it removes the unconscious bias that creeps into manual, admin-led matching.
The MSQ Women in Trades case study above is one example of what that looks like in a workforce-development context, at real scale, with results tracked over multiple cohorts rather than a single pilot. You can see more examples of how organisations are using structured mentoring to move engagement and retention metrics in Brancher's case study library.
If you're building the case for mentoring as part of a broader engagement strategy, it's worth reading alongside our guides on employee retention strategies, reducing attrition, and how to start measuring a mentoring program's success. For hybrid and distributed teams specifically, our piece on building workplace connection without more meetings covers the peer-connection strategy in more depth.
See what values-based matching could do for your engagement numbers. Book a demo or try Brancher's ROI calculator to estimate the retention impact for your organisation.
Satisfaction measures whether someone is content with their pay, conditions and role. Engagement measures whether they're psychologically invested in the work itself and willing to put in discretionary effort. An employee can be satisfied and still disengaged, which is why engagement, not satisfaction alone, is the stronger predictor of the business outcomes covered above.
There isn't one category that covers everything. Pulse survey and analytics platforms measure sentiment, recognition platforms reinforce good work, internal communication tools support two-way dialogue, and structured mentoring platforms like Brancher handle development, onboarding support and peer connection. Most mature engagement strategies combine two or three of these rather than relying on a single tool.
Track leading indicators monthly (survey participation rate, eNPS, engagement index scores) and lagging indicators quarterly (voluntary turnover, absenteeism, internal mobility, productivity). A platform is genuinely effective if improvements in the leading indicators show up in the lagging ones within a couple of quarters; if they don't, the gap is worth investigating before adding further initiatives.
A short pulse survey monthly or quarterly, combined with a deeper annual or biannual census survey, tends to work better than one long annual survey alone. Frequent short surveys catch problems earlier; the deeper survey provides the context to understand why a score moved.
No single initiative fixes engagement on its own, mentoring included. It's most effective as part of a broader strategy that also addresses manager capability, recognition and psychological safety. Where mentoring does add clear value is in development, onboarding and connection specifically, which is why it tends to show up as one part of a wider strategy rather than the whole of it.
Employee engagement in Australia and New Zealand sits at 21%, roughly matching the global average of 20%, according to Gallup's 2026 regional data. Two-thirds of employees (66%) in the region are "not engaged," meaning the majority of the workforce is putting in time but not discretionary effort, the single biggest opportunity most Australian employers have in front of them.
Holly Brailsford is Co-Founder and CEO of Brancher, and a registered organisational psychologist. She writes on employee engagement, mentoring program design and workplace culture, drawing on Brancher's work with organisations across Australia and New Zealand.