Employee Engagement and Organizational Performance

1.1 Introduction

Employee engagement has in the recent past received much attention from researchers especially in the context of government and practitioners (Rayton et al 2012; MacLeod & Clarke 2009). Nonetheless, according to Macey & Schneider (2008), employee engagement has recently gained much interest from scholars as a separate construct in the academic literature, yet the drivers of engagement have not been empirically or theoretically developed. A survey by Robinson et al (2004) attempted to define the term ‘engagement’ through an evaluation of employee behaviors that demonstrated how engaged they were. According to the study, employee engagement Is defined by various employee characteristics including a belief in the organization, a zeal to achieve improved results at work, being helpful and respectful to colleagues, and willingness to go an ‘extra mile’ with respect to tasks. In summary of their research, Robinson et al (2004, pp. 56) concluded that employee engagement can be defined as “an employee’s positive attitude towards an organization and its values.” Hence, there seems to be an overlap of employee engagement with concepts such as organizational citizenship behavior and commitment despite the existence of some difference (Bakker et al 2011). For instance, according to Bakker et al (2011), the organization has to make efforts towards engaging an employee, who also has a choice to determine the level of engagement they can offer to the employer.

There is a plethora of empirical evidence indicating that gaining and maintaining employee engagement is still a challenge to many organizations in the 21st Century. For instance, Markey (2014) highlights a study by Bain & Company participated by hundreds of thousands of employees from 60 countries around the world, which revealed that employee engagement declines as employees stay longer within an organization. More interestingly, the study cited by Markey (2014) indicates that employees on higher ranks of the organizations tend to be more engaged than those in the lower ranks of the organization.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Earlier literature clearly indicates that increased employee commitment to their jobs has a relationship with improved organizational performance (Bakker & Bal 2010). Hence, being that commitment works to improve organizational performance, and the evidence by Bal & Kooij (2011) that employee engagement has some elements of commitment, it is possible to conclude that employee engagement also works to improve organizational performance. In fact, according to Christian et al (2011), some organizations such as Google and Virgin have recently adopted engagement models and are already reaping the benefits of employee engagement in regards to company performance. Similarly, research by Robinson et al (2004) indicates that firms that constantly increase their level of employee engagement tend to have increased sales revenue and customer satisfaction. Similar results have been achieved by the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) upon an adoption of an employee engagement model that they developed (Robinson 2004). The RBS model (as illustrated in figure 1) holds that organizations tend to have more success when their employees not only say that they are satisfied with their jobs but also stay committed and engaged to their jobs by making extra efforts to assist the company to achieve its objectives and goals (Robinson et al 2004).

If, as illustrated by the RBS model, a higher level of employee engagement results in a better organizational performance, then a major question which arises is that how can organizations effectively engage their workforce?

1.3 Research Aim

An exploration of how organizations can effectively engage their workforce

1.4 Research Question

How can organizations effectively engage their employees?

1.5 Justification of the Study

By achieving its aim, this study heeded to a call by Bakker & Schaufeli (2008) for more research in organizational behavior, defined by (Bakker & Demerouti 2008) as the study of positively oriented psychology and human resource capacities that can be improved through constant development, measurement, and effective management. Hence, this study contributed knowledge to human resource managers and general practitioners in human resource management on how to develop their workforce towards engagement, how to measure the level of employee engagement, and how to manage employees in a manner that enhances their level of engagement to maximize the achievement of organizational goals.

1.5.1 A Summary of the Research Process

This study used an analysis of existing literature to achieve its aim. This involved a systematic gathering of evidence from various secondary sources (Harvard Business Review, Personnel Today and a Peer-reviewed Journal article) focusing on employee engagement. Afterward, as recommended by Savin-Baden & Major (2013), these pieces of evidence were used to derive a comprehensive summary of answers to the research question. In short, the paper used evidence from Harvard Business Review (Markey 2014), Personnel Today (2015) and a journal article by (Bakker & Demarouti 2008).

1.6 Data Collection

The journal article, Bakker & Demarouti (2008), was retrieved from an online database called EBSCO through a systematic process that evaluated and screened the study for credibility and reliability before being included for review. Similarly, the study established inclusion/exclusion criteria for the retrieval of the three sources which included: Sources must have been published in the past 10 years and beyond to ensure gathered evidence were most current (Bryman & Bell 2015). Secondly, only the sources that were in full text were admitted into the study, for purposes of a comprehensive analysis (Hitchcock 2012).

1.7 Keywords

The study relied on keywords such as employees, engagement, performance, organizations, and firms. The key words were customized to suit the search engines (Google and EBSCO) for easy retrieval of literature (Ormston et al. 2014). Moreover, there was a use of Boolean operators such as ‘AND’ and ‘OR’ to optimize the search process.

1.8 Data Analysis

Data from the secondary sources were analyzed through thematic analysis. According to Lewis (2015), thematic analysis is the identification of various themes related to a research topic – using them to answer the research question and achieve the research aim. An advantage of thematic analysis is that it enables the researcher to directly identify key themes from a ton of evidence that answers the research question without engaging into complex data analysis procedures (Ioannidis et al. 2015). Hence, this study relied on thematic analysis to identify from secondary data (Harvard Business Review, Personnel Today and a Peer-reviewed Journal article), some of the techniques used by organizations to engage their employees at work.

2.0 Results

2.1 Backer & Demerouti (2008)

A study by Backer & Demerouti (2008) employed both qualitative and quantitative methods to evaluate the model of work engagement, identifying how it is manifested and its antecedents. While the study did not purpose to specifically address the methods through which organizations can constantly keep their employees engaged, the literature explored by this study reveals an interesting insight into the subject matter of the current study. For instance, the study identifies different drivers of work engagement and mentions elements such as the availability of job resources, the salience of job resources, and the availability of employee of employee personal resources as factors that promote employee engagement.

2.1.1 Avail Job Resources

First, Backer & Demerouti (2008) define job resources as the elements of an organization that assist in reducing job demands as well as the associated psychological and physiological costs. Equally, job resources include elements of the workplace that functionally assist in achieving work goals and enhance employee personal growth and development in the workplace (Schaufeli & Bakker 2004). Against this background, Backer & Demerouti (2008) argue that when organizations avail adequate job resources, they create both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation to employees – making them be more engaged at work. Intrinsic motivation is created when an employee learns, grows and develops while extrinsic motivational values of job resources are derived from their instrumentality in achieving work goals. In the case of the latter, Backer & Demerouti (2008) argue that in the presence of job resources, employees gain extrinsic motivation which fosters their willingness to dedicate their abilities and efforts to the job task. Consequently, in such as environment, the employees are more likely to complete the task successfully and achieve the set goals (Backer & Demerouti 2008). For example, when employees constantly have performance feedback and supportive colleagues, they are more likely to achieve their work goals.

In regards to intrinsic motivation, Backer & Demerouti (2008) write that job resources are capable of fulfilling human needs such as relatedness, competence, and autonomy, all which have a relationship with being engaged at work. For instance, when managers give a proper feedback to employees at work, employees are more motivated to learn and this increases that level of competence, while social support and decision latitude satisfy employee’s need for belongingness and autonomy respectively (Backer & Demerouti 2008). Findings by Backer & Demerouti (2008) on a consistent relationship between job resources and increased employee engagement through intrinsic and extrinsic motivation corroborate with those of other studies. For instance, Schaufeli & Backer (2004) in their study participated by Dutch employees, found a positive relationship between job resources (social support, feedback, and coaching) and high employee engagement (absorption, dedication, and vigor). To give a specific narration of this study, Schaufeli & Backer (2004) used a structural equation modeling analysis to prove that job resources, and not job demand were exclusive predictors of employee engagement, and that employee engagement mediates the relationship between employee turnover intentions and job resources.

2.2 Markey (2014)

Rendered as an article in the Harvard Business Review, Markey (2014) gives an account of what he terms ‘The four Secrets to Employee Engagement’. In this article, the author begins with a statement that supervisors and HR managers who encourage their teams to achieve success gives constant feedback to them and responds to employees’ concerns have more engaged employees. Markey (2014) goes ahead to explain how companies such as Rackspace have made a significant investment in employee engagement thereby reaping massive sales revenue growth as a result of exceptional customer services delivered by highly engaged employees.

2.2.1 Let the supervisors take the Lead, not the HR

In evaluating Markey (2014)’s ‘secrets’ to employee engagement, a theme that emerges is that employees are highly engaged when organizations put line supervisors and not HR as the lead overseers of employee engagement. In this regard, Markey (2014) explains that putting employee supervisors as the lead overseers of employee engagement is more effective in cultivating employee engagement because they are the ones responsible for team engagement as opposed to the higher managers who only prescribe solutions. The author also cites a survey by Netsurvey indicating that 87% employees who ‘promote’ their companies also give high ratings to their supervisors, meaning that putting supervisors at the forefront in the development of employee engagement is more effective than when HR managers take the lead.

2.2.2 Train the Supervisors

Markey (2014) also argue that organizations can achieve a highly engaged workforce when supervisors are trained on how to engage with employees because not all of them are natural at it. According to Markey (2014), companies that are successful in employee engagement provide coaching and training to their line supervisors so that they may understand how to have constructive and engaging conversations with their employees. Moreover, according to Markey (2014), as also agreed by Backer & Demerouti (2008), training enables supervisors to learn how to take quick actions and give feedback to employees the important role they have played in delivering company improvement.

2.3 Personnel Today (2015)

2.3.1 Maximize Employee Time

Personnel Today (2015) begins by citing a research from Deloitte which reveals that employee engagement and retention were the second highest priorities for managers, second to the challenge of building global leadership. Moreover, before delving into the techniques used by organizations to build employee engagement, Personnel Today (2015) asserts that workforce engagement is among the major factors that contribute to success in business through profit maximization, staff retention, higher productivity and customer satisfaction.

Against this backdrop, the first technique for enhancing employee engagement as asserted by Personnel Today (2015) is the maximization of employee time. For instance, maximization of the time spent by HR by introducing tools to communicate and measure employee satisfaction plays a major role in promoting employee engagement; because most HR tasks (e.g. pay-roll management and maintaining employee records) limit HR from taking part in other roles such as workforce engagement (Personnel Today 2015). Moreover, according to Personnel Today (2015), most roles assigned to the HR involve the use of ‘systems of record’ than identifying and measuring employee satisfaction. Hence, establishing tools that promote a proactive communication with employees (e.g. creating social networks) can help maximize HR’s time to enable them to devote more time to other strategic issues such as employee engagement (Personnel Today 2015).

2.3.2 Establish Transparency and Communication

Personnel Today (2015) argue further that employees can be kept engaged when there are a constant communication and transparency within the organization. According to Personnel Today (2015), a transparent HR system enables employees to understand certain aspects of the organization, making them more engaged than when they are not aware of some happenings in the organization e.g. an introduction of a new compensation system. These assertions corroborate with those of Hakanen & Roodt (2010) that when there is a transparent HR system, managers are able to see where employees stand in regards to the goals and objectives of the organization, and they are able to intervene if need be.

In conclusion, this study report has established that employee engagement is a complex affair involving various factors that must be considered by both HR and supervisors to be achieved. Among these factors, as established by this report, include the establishment of adequate job resources, putting supervisors at the forefront of employee engagement cultivation, training supervisors on how to adequately and effectively engage with employees, establishing HR tools that promote employee engagement, and maintaining a constant communication and transparency within the organization. The findings of this report imply that managers must seriously consider these factors when designing their employee engagement strategies. Last but not least, this report recommends that organizations should consider workplace engagement as a major contributor to organizational success (as illustrated by the RBS model) and therefore should be given priority as a strategic issue.

2.3.3 A Summary of the Research Process

The study aimed to explore how organizations can keep their workforce engaged. This research area was selected based on the researcher’s personal and professional interest. After the identification of the research area, the researcher formulated the research question which is: how can organizations engage their workforce? Thereafter, data was collected through literature review, where relevant data on employee engagement was gathered from secondary sources (journal articles and periodicals) to answer the research question. A literature review was deemed fit for the study because it enables the researcher to identify the current situation of the topic i.e. what is already known about the techniques and methods of keeping employees engaged. This is as opposed to primary data collection where the researcher attempts to make conclusions from fresh data regardless of the accuracy or credibility issues associated with the study (Savin-Baden & Major 2013). Moreover, a literature review was considered advantageous because as opposed to primary data collection, the process of literature review is quicker, easier and cheaper (Bakker & Demarouti 2008). The study then adopted thematic data analysis technique to analyse the secondary data, which involves an identification of major themes from the reviewed literature that answer the research question. After data analysis, the study concluded that: adequate job resources, putting supervisors at the forefront of employee engagement cultivation, training supervisors on how to adequately and effectively engage with employees, establishing HR tools that promote employee engagement, and maintaining a constant communication and transparency within the organization are some of the effective techniques of keeping the workforce engaged.

References

Bakker, B & Demerouti, E. (2008). “Towards a model of work engagement”, Career Development International, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 209-223.

Bakker, A.B. and Schaufeli, W.B. (2008), “Positive organizational behavior: engaged employees

Bakker, A.B., Albrecht, S.L., and Leiter, M.P. (2011), ‘Key Questions Regarding Work

Engagement,’ European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20, 4–28.

Bakker, A.B., and Bal, P.M. (2010), ‘Weekly Work Engagement and Performance: A Study AmongStarting Teachers,’ Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 83, 189–206

Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2015). Business research methods. Oxford University Press, USA.

Hitchcock, D. (2012). Deductive and inductive: Types of validity, not types of argument. Informal Logic, 2(3).

Bal, .M., Chiaburu, D.S., and Diaz, I. (2011), ‘Does Psychological Contract Breach Decrease

Proactive Behaviors? The Moderating Effect of Emotion Regulation,’ Group & Organization

Bal, .M., and Kooij, D. (2011), ‘The Relations Between Work Centrality, Psychological Contracts, and Job Attitudes: The Influence of Age,’ European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20, 497–523.

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,’ Personnel Psychology, 64, 89–136.

Hakanen, J.J., andRoodt, G. (2010), ‘Using the JobDemands–ResourcesModel toPredictEngagement:Analyzing a Conceptual Model,’ in Work Engagement: A Handbook of Essential Theory and Research, eds. A.B. Bakker and M.P. Leiter, New York: Psychology Press, pp. 85–101.

Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal Of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 268-279. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.268

Macey, W.H., and Schneider, B. (2008), ‘The Meaning of Employee Engagement,’ Industrial andOrganizational Psychology, 1, 3–30.

Ormston, R., Spencer, L., Barnard, M., & Snape, D. (2014). The foundations of qualitative research. Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers, 2.

Rayton, B., Dodge, T., and D’Analeze, S. (2012), Employee Engagement: The Evidence, London: Engage for Success.

Savin-Baden, M., & Major, C. H. (2013). Qualitative research: The essential guide to theory and practice. Routledge.

Schaufeli, W.B. and Bakker, A.B. (2004), “Job demands, job resources and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study”, Journal of Organizational Behavior,