07).Employee Engagement
Employee engagement is a
workplace approach resulting in the right conditions for all members of an
organization to give of their best each day, committed to their organization’s
goals and values, motivated to contribute to organizational success, with an
enhanced sense of their own well-being. Employee engagement is based on trust,
integrity, two way commitment and communication between an organization and its
members. It is an approach that increases the chances of business success,
contributing to organizational and individual performance, productivity and
well-being.
According
employee work engagement is defined as a “positive, fulfilling, work-related
state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption” (Schaufeli
et al., 2002a,b,
p. 74). Kahn
(1990) conceptualized engagement as “harnessing of organization
members’ selves to their work roles” and stated that in engagement, “people
employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally during
role performances” (p. 694). Demerouti
et al. (2010) emphasized the benefits of work engagement for
individuals and for organizations because the way individuals accomplish their
work and fulfill their tasks depends on the extent to which they are engaged in
their work. Rich
et al. (2010) described engaged employees as more attentive and
focused on their responsibilities than less engaged employees, as emotionally
connected to their role tasks, and as more enthusiastic workers, and other
researchers suggested that because engaged employees are also active in social
activities and hobbies outside work (Schaufeli
et al., 2001), positive effects of work engagement spill over into private
life and vice versa (Grzywacz
and Marks, 2000), which in turn leads to improved individual and group
performance.
Because
engaged employees possess energetic and affective connections with their work
activities, see themselves as capable of dealing with job demands, and transfer
their engagement to others at work (Bakker,
2009; Demerouti
et al., 2010), they are more likely to contribute to sustainable individual
and organizational development while promoting a healthy workplace (Bakker
et al., 2011). It is crucial for organizations to sense the true essence of
work engagement, especially in the public sector, to better identify its
drivers (Mostafa
and Abed El-Motalib, 2020). The government in Uzbekistan sees state
employees as one of the main assets in promoting public sector reform (Ergashev,
2006), and thus, government employees’ work attitudes are of the utmost
importance to administrators there (Ergashev,
2006). The form of ownership is the main distinctive point between state
and private organizations in Uzbekistan. Specifically, the government controls
and operates public sector organizations, whereas the state has no stake in
private sector organizations (Ergashev,
2006). Public organizations are vulnerable to political constraints, which
lead to frequent changes in policy. Their goals are pursued through political
processes rather than by individual managers as in private organizations (Ernazarov,
2020). Another characteristic of public organizations is that they usually
have more formal decision-making procedures, and another way they differ from
the private sectors is that these organizations have few rivals in providing
services such as in education and health (Ernazarov,
2020; Abdulhaevna,
2021).
Further
than according to Kahn’s theory (1990, 1992), meaningfulness describes how
valuable a work goal is in relation to an individual’s own standards. Employees
who have faith that a given work role activity is personally meaningful are
likely to fully immerse themselves in it. Engaged individuals experience high
connectivity with their work tasks and strive toward task-related goals that
are intertwined with their in-role definitions and scripts; they also make
extra efforts to resolve job-related problems, which in return leads to high
job performance (Christian
et al., 2011; Al-dalahmeh
et al., 2018). Thus, this study is the first examination of engagement as a
mediator in the relationship between job meaningfulness and performance.
Meanwhile, supportive, trustworthy coworker relationships produce high work
engagement as well (Kahn,
1990), and task interdependence generates positive coworker relationships (Lee
et al., 2018). When employees fail to experience meaning in their work,
highly interdependent workers provide each other with information, advice,
help, and resources, which serve to amplify their work-related attitudes and
behaviors (Kim
and Oh, 2020).
Work Engagement
Work engagement refers to high personal investment in one’s work role and includes the characteristics of being energized, cognitively vigilant, and willing to invest extra effort to achieve goals (Sonnentag et al., 2010). Research interest in work engagement has increased in recent decades; currently, it is an extremely relevant and meaningful area of inquiry (Karatepe and Karadas, 2015). Work engagement is a construct comprises three dimensions: vigor, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli et al., 2002b). Schaufeli et al. (2002b) define vigor as expressions of high energy and motivation at work and dedication as indicating an employee’s perceptions of the meaning of work; dedication entails a sense of pride in the job and its challenges. Finally, absorption refers to the degree to which an employee is focused on and happily engrossed in work; absorbed workers are unaware of the passage of time and find it difficult to detach themselves from their tasks (Schaufeli et al., 2002b).
Work
Engagement and Performance
The effects of work engagement on job performance as
a predictor have been an increasing topic of academic study (Demerouti et al., 2010). Demerouti et al. (2010) and Kim and Park (2020)
highlighted many advantages to employee engagement. Engaged employees exhibit
high energy and strong mental resilience, and they tend to voluntarily invest
considerable effort in their assigned tasks. Moreover, highly engaged employees
tend to have a sense of their work’s significance and challenges, and they
express enthusiasm and pride in their work, thus enhancing their performance.
According
to Kahn
(1990, 1992)
posited work engagement as a psychological state of mind whereby people are
attentive, connected, integrated, and focused in their role performance and
stated that employees’ “being there” gives them access to their considerable
energies and talents in fulfilling work-related tasks and goals. Many studies
have shown a significantly positive relationship between employee engagement
and performance (Ismail
et al., 2019; Zheng
et al., 2020). Kahn
(1990, 1992)
further stated that work engagement refers to a psychological connection with
performing work tasks rather than attitudes toward the job itself. Engaged
individuals approach tasks with a sense of self-investment, energy, and
passion, which should translate into higher in-role and extra-role performance
(Kahn,
1990, 1992).
Moreover, engaged employees are excited about their work (Bakker,
2009), and enthusiastic employees are positively driven to perform better
at work.
References
·
Abdulhaevna,
K. M. (2021). Public organizations in Uzbekistan–in the interests of the state
and people. Turk. J. Comput. Math. Educ. 12, 3402–3406.Google Scholar
·
Al-dalahmeh,
M., Khalaf, R., and Obeidat, B. (2018). The effect of employee engagement on
organizational performance via the mediating role of job satisfaction: the case
of IT employees in Jordanian banking sector. Mod. Appl. Sci. 12, 17–43.
doi: 10.5539/mas.v12n6p17CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
·
Bakker,
A. B. (2009). “Building engagement in the workplace,” in The Peak Performing
Organization, eds R. J. Burke and C. L. Cooper (Milton Park: Routledge),
50–72. doi: 10.4324/9780203971611.ch3CrossRef Full
Text | Google Scholar
·
Bakker,
A. B. (2011). An evidence-based model of work engagement. Curr. Dir.
Psychol. Sci. 20, 265–269. doi: 10.1177/0963721411414534CrossRef Full
Text | Google Scholar
·
Bakker,
A. B., Albrecht, S. L., and Leiter, M. P. (2011). Key questions regarding work
engagement. Eur. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 20, 4–28. doi:
10.1080/1359432X.2010.485352CrossRef
Full Text | Google Scholar
·
Christian,
M. S., Garza, A. S., and Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: a
quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual
performance. Pers. Psychol. 64, 89–136. doi:
10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01203.xCrossRef
Full Text | Google Scholar
·
Demerouti,
E., Cropanzano, R., Bakker, A., and Leiter, M. (2010). “From thought to action:
employee work engagement and job performance,” in Work Engagement: A
Handbook of Essential Theory Research, eds A. B. Bakker and M. P. Leiter
(Hove: Psychology Press), 147–163.Google Scholar
·
Ergashev,
B. (2006). Public administration reform in Uzbekistan. Probl. Econ. Transit.
48, 32–82. doi: 10.2753/PET1061-1991481202CrossRef Full
Text | Google Scholar
·
Ernazarov,
D. (2020). Analysis of the policy of the republic of Uzbekistan regarding
international non-governmental organization. J. Polit. Sci. Int. Relat.
3, 9–15. doi: 10.11648/j.jpsir.20200301.12
·
Grzywacz,
J. G., and Marks, N. F. (2000). Reconceptualizing the work–family interface: an
ecological perspective on the correlates of positive and negative spillover
between work and family. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 5:111. doi:
10.1037/1076-8998.5.1.111
·
Ismail,
H. N., Iqbal, A., and Nasr, L. (2019). Employee engagement and job performance
in Lebanon: the mediating role of creativity. Int. J. Prod. Perf. Manag.
68, 506–523. doi: 10.1108/IJPPM-02-2018-0052CrossRef Full
Text | Google Scholar
·
Kahn,
W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement
at work. Acad. Manag. J. 33, 692–724. doi: 10.5465/256287CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
·
Kahn,
W. A. (1992). To be fully there: psychological presence at work. Hum. Relat.
45, 321–349. doi: 10.1177/001872679204500402CrossRef Full
Text | Google Scholar
·
Karatepe,
O. M., and Karadas, G. (2015). Do psychological capital and work engagement
foster frontline employees’ satisfaction? Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag.
27, 1254–1278. doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-01-2014-0028CrossRef Full
Text | Google Scholar
·
Kim,
C. D., and Oh, S. J. (2020). Impact of employee’s gratitude disposition on
organizational citizenship behavior: focus on multi-mediated effects of
perceived organizational support and job satisfaction. J. Korea Cont. Assoc.
20, 686–701.Google Scholar
·
Lee,
S. H., Shin, Y., and Kim, M. (2018). Why work meaningfulness alone is not
enough: the role of social identification and task interdependence as
facilitative boundary conditions. Curr. Psychol. 40, 1031–1047. doi:
10.1007/s12144-018-0027-0
·
Mostafa,
A. M. S., and Abed El-Motalib, E. A. (2020). Ethical leadership, work
meaningfulness, and work engagement in the public sector. Rev. Public Pers.
Adm. 40, 112–131. doi: 10.1177/0734371X18790628CrossRef Full
Text | Google Scholar
·
Rich,
B. L., Lepine, J. A., and Crawford, E. R. (2010). Job engagement: antecedents
and effects on job performance. Acad. Manag. J. 53, 617–635. doi:
10.5465/amj.2010.51468988
·
Schaufeli,
W., Taris, T., Le Blanc, P., Peeters, M., Bakker, A., and De Jonge, J. (2001).
Maakt arbeid gezond. Op Zoek Naar Bevlogen Werknemer 2001, 422–428.
·
Schaufeli,
W. B., Martinez, I. M., Pinto, A. M., Salanova, M., and Bakker, A. B. (2002a).
Burnout and engagement in university students: a cross-national study. J.
Cross-Cult. Psychol. 33, 464–481. doi: 10.1177/0022022102033005003CrossRef
Full Text | Google Scholar
·
Schaufeli,
W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., and Bakker, A. B. (2002b). The
measurement of engagement and burnout: a two sample confirmatory factor
analytic approach. J. Happiness Stud. 3, 71–92. doi:
10.1023/A:1015630930326
·
Sonnentag,
S., Dormann, C., and Demerouti, E. (2010). “Not all days are created equal: the
concept of state work engagement,” in Work Engagement: A Handbook of
Essential Theory and Research, eds A. B. Bakker and M. P. Leiter (Hove:
Psychology Press), 25–38.Google Scholar
·
Zheng,
Y., Graham, L., Epitropaki, O., and Snape, E. (2020). Service leadership, work
engagement, and service performance: the moderating role of leader skills. Group
Organ. Manag. 45, 43–74. doi: 10.1177/1059601119851978CrossRef Full
Text | Google Scholar
Hi Pushpa Jayanthi, I totally agreed with your content, The concepts of employee engagement and work engagement are said to be comparable since they are connected to job needs and work resources, according to some scholars who view them as significant terms in the HRD area. (Satata, 2021)
ReplyDeleteThank you Zacky for giving your comment on my blog. According to Kahn (1990, 1992) posited work engagement as a psychological state of mind whereby people are attentive, connected, integrated, and focused in their role performance and stated that employees’ “being there” gives them access to their considerable energies and talents.
DeletePushpa as per the topic of Engagement and performance,Engagement presents the key elements of the engagement management process and outlines key aspects of each stage that can satisfy three psychological conditions that drive employee engagement and improve subsequent job performance. Three psychological conditions serve as precursors to personal engagement. psychological meaning, psychological safety, and psychological availability (Jamie A. Gruman, 2011).
ReplyDeleteThanks for your mention. Many studies have shown a significantly positive relationship between employee engagement and performance (Ismail et al., 2019; Zheng et al., 2020). Kahn (1990, 1992) further stated that work engagement refers to a psychological connection with performing work tasks rather than attitudes toward the job itself.
DeleteHi Pushpa Jayanthi, I totally agreed with your content, Employee engagement is critical in organizations because it improves individual performance, which leads to job happiness (Garg, Dar & Mishra, 2018). Training in the provision of services to others is a beneficial part of employee engagement (Johnson, Park & Bartlett, 2018). Other factors, such as the character of the person being served, influence the amount of engagement in the organization (Wang & Chen, 2019).
ReplyDeleteHi Christina .thanks for your comment. When employees fail to experience meaning in their work, highly interdependent workers provide each other with information, advice, help, and resources, which serve to amplify their work-related attitudes and behaviors (Kim and Oh, 2020).
DeleteWell composed. Agreed on the content. According to () Employee engagement entails including workers in all decision-making activities such as policy formulation, policy modifications, and so on.
ReplyDeleteEmployee engagement initiatives are vital since they assist not just the firm develop as well as the employees' continued growth.
According to Stone (2021) there are few drawbacks of employee engagement such as,
Top policies may reveal to the bottom line employees
Difficult to match the IQ levels of all employees
Confidential Information Security has a greater risk
The procedure is expensive for the company
Messages may turn into rumors very fast
Thanks for valuable comments. Engaged individuals approach tasks with a sense of self-investment, energy, and passion, which should translate into higher in-role and extra-role performance (Kahn, 1990, 1992). Moreover, engaged employees are excited about their work (Bakker, 2009), and enthusiastic employees are positively driven to perform better at work.
DeleteAgreed. Furthermore, work engagement is a full, positive emotional and cognitive state that is connected to work and is characterized by persistence and dispersion (Li and Ling, 2007; Aldabbas et al., 2021). According to some academics, as work engagement rises, employee emotional, cognitive, and forward-thinking behaviors will likewise advance, which will improve job performance (Wang and Chen, 2020).
ReplyDeleteThanks for your mention. Work engagement is a construct comprises three dimensions: vigor, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli et al., 2002b). Schaufeli et al. (2002b) define vigor as expressions of high energy and motivation at work and dedication as indicating an employee’s perceptions of the meaning of work; dedication entails a sense of pride in the job and its challenges. Finally, absorption refers to the degree to which an employee is focused on and happily engrossed in work; absorbed workers are unaware of the passage of time and find it difficult to detach themselves from their tasks (Schaufeli et al., 2002b).
DeleteGreat One, By establishing a supportive and accepting corporate culture, an employer can maintain the development of professional relationships at work. Indoor employee engagement games can also be used to strengthen current bonds. Learn what employee engagement games are, why they're important, and go through our website's assortment of fun indoor employee engagement games.
ReplyDeleteThanks For your comment & suggestion.
ReplyDeleteGood article Pushpa, inaddition there are three key elements of employee engagement namely vigor or the willingness, dedication and absorption (Schaufeli and Bakker, 2004). Furthermore you have well identified that having a better employee engagement within the organization will definitely supports in enhancing the relationship in between the employees and the employer.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your adding comment Shermila. According employee work engagement is defined as a “positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption” (Schaufeli et al., 2002a,b, p. 74). Kahn (1990) conceptualized engagement as “harnessing of organization members’ selves to their work roles” and stated that in engagement, “people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally during role performances”
DeleteGreat article Pushpa, agreed with you , furthermore (Perrin's Global Workforce Study from 2003) uses the phrase "employees' willingness and ability to help their organization thrive, usually through committing discretionary effort on a sustained basis." According to the study, involvement is influenced by a wide range of factors, including the emotional and intellectual demands of the job as well as the overall work environment. further, Employee engagement is defined by the Gallup organization as involvement in and excitement for the job. (Dernovsek 2008) quotes Gallup and compares employee engagement to a strong sense of commitment and emotional connectedness among workers.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your valuable comment. According to Kahn (1990, 1992) posited work engagement as a psychological state of mind whereby people are attentive, connected, integrated, and focused in their role performance and stated that employees’ “being there” gives them access to their considerable energies and talents in fulfilling work-related tasks and goals. Many studies have shown a significantly positive relationship between employee engagement and performance
ReplyDeleteGood article Pushpa. Further, communication makes possible the interaction between members of the working team. A manager should be the first to establish bridges between the members of the organization, through careful and effective communication. Through communication, organization activities scroll correctly (Bucata & Rizecsu, 2017).
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment Miyuru. The effects of work engagement on job performance as a predictor have been an increasing topic of academic study (Demerouti et al., 2010). Demerouti et al. (2010) and Kim and Park (2020) highlighted many advantages to employee engagement. Engaged employees exhibit high energy and strong mental resilience, and they tend to voluntarily invest considerable effort in their assigned tasks. Moreover, highly engaged employees tend to have a sense of their work’s significance and challenges, and they express enthusiasm and pride in their work, thus enhancing their performance.
DeleteI totally agree with your content. Comprehensive training and development program aids in deliberating on the knowledge, skills and attitudes crucil to achieve organizational goals and objectives and also to sharp competitive advantage (Peteraf 1993). Furthermore, in the commencement of the twenty-first century Human Resource Managers have opined that one of the main challenges they are to confront had involved issues in regards to training and development (Stavrou, Brewster and Charalambous 2004). Moreover , by selecting the right type of training, employers ensure that their employees possess the right skills for the business, and the same need to be consistently updated in the follow up of new HR practices. To face current and future business demands, training and development process has mingled its strategic role and in this way few studies by Stavrou et al.’s (2004) and Apospori, Nikandrou, Brewster and Papalexandris’s (2008), have scored much attentiveness as they highlight the T&D practices in cross-national approach. Apospori et al. (2008) had deduced that there is a considerable impact on training organizational performance.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your valuable comment.Employee engagement is based on trust, integrity, two way commitment and communication between an organization and its members. It is an approach that increases the chances of business success, contributing to organizational and individual performance, productivity and well-being. Research interest in work engagement has increased in recent decades; currently, it is an extremely relevant and meaningful area of inquiry (Karatepe and Karadas, 2015). Work engagement is a construct comprises three dimensions: vigor, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli et al., 2002b). Schaufeli et al. (2002b) define vigor as expressions of high energy and motivation at work and dedication as indicating an employee’s perceptions of the meaning of work; dedication entails a sense of pride in the job and its challenges
DeleteThanks For your valuable Comment. Work engagement refers to high personal investment in one’s work role and includes the characteristics of being energized, cognitively vigilant, and willing to invest extra effort to achieve goals (Sonnentag et al., 2010). Research interest in work engagement has increased in recent decades; currently, it is an extremely relevant and meaningful area of inquiry (Karatepe and Karadas, 2015).
ReplyDeleteAgreed with your blog post Pushpa. Furthermore, according to May et al (2004) engagement is most closely associated with the constructs of job involvement and ‘flow’ (Csikszentmihalyi 1990). Job involvement is defined as ‘a cognitive or belief state of psychological identification’ (Kanungo 1982:342). This differs from engagement in that it is concerned more with how the individual employs him/her self during the performance of his/her job. Furthermore, whilst the focus of job involvement is on cognitions, engagement, according to most definitions, also encompasses emotions and behaviours.
ReplyDeleteGreat article Pushpa, Seems like you've researched a lot on this. Adding to the above, Without effective and enthusiastic staff, a business cannot thrive. Every person employed has been offered a job because they are necessary to the company, and they are expected to perform well throughout their employment. It’s for this reason that it’s important to be invested in employees, because business-owners expect employees to be invested in the company (Bragg, 2022).
ReplyDelete