Jump to content

Work engagement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 67.132.73.98 (talk) at 18:13, 23 January 2009 (→‎Engagement in business: Edited for clarity). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Work engagement, also called Employee engagement, is a concept that is generally viewed as managing discretionary effort, that is, when employees have choices, they will act in a way that furthers their organization's interests. An engaged worker is a person who is fully involved in, and enthusiastic about, his or her work.

Engagement in business

Although rather popular in business and consultancy firms, academic research on work engagement is rather scarce. Mayor consultancy firms such are Development Dimensions International (DDI), Gallup, Hewitt Associates, Mercer, and Towers Perrin define work engagement in terms of -a combination of- well-known concepts like affective organizational commitment (i.e., the emotional attachment to the organization), continuance commitment (i.e., the desire to stay with the organization), extra-role behavior (i.e., discretionary behavior that promotes the effective functioning of the organization), or job satisfaction (i.e. a positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job). Unfortunately these claims - that work engagement positively impacts a company’s profitability - cannot be verified because crucial information is not made public by these consulting organizations. An exception is The Gallup Organization that showed in a study based on nearly 8,000 business units of 36 companies that those units in the top 25% on “work engagement” produced 1% to 4% higher profitability and had, on average, between $80,000 and $120,000 higher monthly revenues or sales than the units in the bottom 25%. This translated into a difference of at least $960,000 per year per business unit [1].

However, rather than the experience of engagement, Gallup’s questionnaire (called Q12) assesses the antecedents of this experience in terms of perceived job resources.

Engagement in academia

Kahn [2] was the first scholar to define “personal engagement” as the “…harnessing of organization member’s selves to their work roles: in engagement, people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, emotionally and mentally during role performances” (p. 694). Based on this definition a questionnaire was developed that assesses three dimensions: cognitive, emotional and physical engagement [3].

An alternative academic considers work engagement as a psychological state of fulfillment and the positive antithesis of burnout [4]. It is defined as “…a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption” [5] (p. 74). Whereby vigor is characterized by high levels of energy and mental resilience while working, the willingness to invest effort in one’s work, and persistence even in the face of difficulties; dedication by being strongly involved in one's work, and experiencing a sense of significance, enthusiasm, inspiration, pride, and challenge; and absorption by being fully concentrated and happily engrossed in one’s work, whereby time passes quickly and one has difficulties with detaching oneself from work. These three aspects are assessed by the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES [6]), which is currently available in 20 languages and can be used freely for non-commercial purposes. In addition a short form [7] and a student version [8] are available. The reliability and validity of the UWES is documented is various studies (for an overview see [9]).


Research findings

Work engagement as measured by the UWES is positively related with, but can nevertheless be differentiated from, similar constructs such as job involvement and organizational commitment [10], in-role and extra-role behavior [11]; personal initiative [12], Type A [13], and workaholism [14]. Moreover, engaged workers are characterized by low levels of burnout [15], as well as by low levels of neuroticism and high levels of extraversion [16]. Also they enjoy good mental and physical health [17].

Work engagement is found to be positively associated with job resources such as social support from co-workers and from one’s superior, performance feedback, coaching, job control, task variety, opportunities for learning and development, and training facilities (for a review see [18]). In short: engaged workers work in challenging jobs.

Engagement is related to better performance. For instance, engaged contact workers from hotels and restaurants produce better service quality as perceived by their customers [19]; the more engaged university students feel the higher their next year’s Grade Point Average [20]; the higher the level of engagement of flight attendants, the better their in- and extra-role performance on the flight [21]; and the more engaged restaurant workers, the higher the financial turnover of the shift [22].

References

  1. ^ Harter, J.K., Schmidt, F.L. & Hayes, T.L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationships between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 268-279
  2. ^ Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692-724
  3. ^ May, D. R., Gilson, R. L., & Harter, L. M. (2004). The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 11-37
  4. ^ Schaufeli, W.B. & Salanova, M. (2007). Work engagement: An emerging psychological concept and its implications for organizations. In S.W. Gilliland, D.D. Steiner. & D.P. Skarlicki (Eds.), Research in Social Issues in Management (Volume 5): Managing Social and Ethical Issues in Organizations. (pp. 135-177). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishers
  5. ^ Schaufeli, W.B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of Engagement and burnout: A confirmative analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71-92
  6. ^ Schaufeli, W.B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of Engagement and burnout: A confirmative analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71-92
  7. ^ Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B. & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 701-716
  8. ^ Schaufeli, W.B., Martínez, I., Marques Pinto, A. Salanova, M. & Bakker, A.B. (2002). Burnout and engagement in university students: A cross national study. Journal of Cross- Cultural Psychology, 33, 464-481
  9. ^ Schaufeli, W.B. & Salanova, M. (2007). Work engagement: An emerging psychological concept and its implications for organizations. In S.W. Gilliland, D.D. Steiner. & D.P. Skarlicki (Eds.), Research in Social Issues in Management (Volume 5): Managing Social and Ethical Issues in Organizations. (pp. 135-177). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishers
  10. ^ Hallberg, U., & Schaufeli, W.B. (2006). “Same same” but different: Can work engagement be discriminated from job involvement and organizational commitment? European Journal of Psychology, 11, 119-127
  11. ^ Schaufeli, W.B., Taris, T.W., & Bakker, A. (2006). Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hide: On the differences between work engagement and workaholism. In: R. Burke (Ed), Work hours and work addiction (pp. 193-252). Edward Elgar: Northhampton, UK
  12. ^ Salanova, M., & Schaufeli, W.B. (2008). A cross-national study of work engagement as a mediator between job resources and proactive behavior: A cross-national study. International Journal of Human Resources Management, 19, 226-231
  13. ^ Hallberg, U., Johansson, G. & Schaufeli, W.B. (2007). Type A behaviour and work situation: Associations with burnout and work engagement. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 48, 135-142
  14. ^ Schaufeli, W.B., Taris, T.W., & Van Rhenen, W. (2008). Workaholism, burnout and engagement: Three of a kind or three different kinds of employee well-being? Applied Psychology: An International Review, 57, 173-203
  15. ^ González-Roma, V., Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A., Lloret, S. (2006). Burnout and engagement: Independent factors or opposite poles? Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 68, 165-174
  16. ^ Langelaan, S., Bakker, A.B., Van Doornen, L.J.P. & Schaufeli, W.B. (2006). Burnout and work engagement: Do individual differences make a difference? Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 521-532
  17. ^ Schaufeli, W.B., Taris, T.W., & Van Rhenen, W. (2008). Workaholism, burnout and engagement: Three of a kind or three different kinds of employee well-being? Applied Psychology: An International Review, 57, 173-203
  18. ^ Schaufeli, W.B. & Salanova, M. (2007). Work engagement: An emerging psychological concept and its implications for organizations. In S.W. Gilliland, D.D. Steiner. & D.P. Skarlicki (Eds.), Research in Social Issues in Management (Volume 5): Managing Social and Ethical Issues in Organizations. (pp. 135-177). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishers
  19. ^ Salanova, M., Agut, S., & Peiró, J.M. (2005). Linking organizational resources and Work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: The mediating role of service climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1217-1227
  20. ^ Salanova, M., Bresó, E. & Schaufeli, W.B. (2005). Hacia un modelo espiral de la autoeficacia en el estudio del burnout y Engagement [Towards a spiral model of self-efficacy in burnout and engagement research] Ansiedad y Estrés, 11, 215-231
  21. ^ Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A.B., Heuven, E., Demerouti, E. & Schaufeli, W.B. (2008). Working in the sky: A dairy study among flight attendants. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 13, 345-356
  22. ^ Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E. & Schaufeli, W.B. (in press). Work engagement and financial returns: A diary study on the role of job and personal resources. Journal of Organizational and Occupational Psychology