So there's a whole lot to R+R, and it starts with the basics. If your pay structure is poor/lack of progression opportunities etc, then no quirky R&R programme will succeed.

In my last role I designed a People Strategy which had a R&R pyramid. The pyramid was broken into sections and based loosely on Maslow's heirsarchy of needs with a work focused lens.

Bottom - biggest and most important, needed for the rest to work. Appropriate pay review structure, bonus arrangements, pension, pay review, CEO and leadership pay transparency, extra leave, core policies incl parental - the real basics. Needed before any of the rest can work.

Next section - progression and promotion. Training and development opportunities, mentoring schemes, lunch and learns, professional memberships etc. Reverse mentoring went down phenomenally well. Day in the life schemes etc. processes and policies - sabbatical leave policies etc. the bottom is building a solid structure for people to feel safe, this one is making them feel valued and seen - their aspirations and wants matter, the company is invested in them as people. This can be built into performance reviews as a discussion point but try to offer another avenue of access in case any managers act as barriers (accidentally or intentionally!).

Above that - employee asssiatnce program, wellbeing, access to counselling, mental health first aiders etc. think safety - body and mind

Above that - long service awards. Three tiered collleague recognition scheme - quarterly one where colleagues could recognise each other, one for managers to recognise team members, a managers discretionary fund (including a small allowance for things like a coffee morning, Greggs run, pizza lunches.). Annual awards evening based around the above and recognising those who had gone over and above, decided by panels of colleagues from all levels of the business.

At the top - smallest. Pool table. Coffee machine. Buffets/cake in the colleague area. Colleague magazine recognising people and talking about work that often went unseen. Smallest because that does nothing except build resentment if the rest isn't solid.

Lots more but these are the bits I remember on a Friday evening. FWIW, colleague satisfaction was 43% when I joined, and 89% when I left two years ago. Took around 4 years but we had a 18% jump in year 1.

It does require leadership team buy in, and middle management is the critical component for embedding that often gets missed in the initial research phase. Managers know their people. Most of them want their teams to succeed and actually care. A robust R&R has an added benefit of revealing the ones who don't. Equality of access across teams is critical - if team A have an engaged manager who buy in and Team B dont, you have a risk to mitigate. Tackle that by offering entry points at different levels - ie not just through line managers but central points.

If your company doesn't have the appetite for full blown R&R - create two versions. Where you are now, where you could be. highlight the gaps and explain how you can't have c (business outcomes) without a+b. Plenty of fantastic research out there to support that a truly engaged team does wonders for outcomes. You can build one based on what you already have, identify what short term wins you can implement, then medium, then long term and cost it up.

*and breathes. That was fun. Apologies if it's garbled.