Employee Engagement

For many employers, in the modern context, employee engagement has become the main focus when discussing employment relations (Emmot, 2015). Employee engagement is a psychological state of employees where a sense of commitment is felt towards their organizations and their values (CIPD, 2021). Shaufeli and Bakker (2004) state that it is a positive, fulfilled, work related mind-set characterized by the below features.

Vigour – High energy level, mental resilience when working, investing in work and persisting even in the face of adversity.

Dedication – High levels of involvement. Sense of pride, enthusiasm and worth in the work being done.

Absorption – High levels of concentration on work. Difficulties in detaching oneself from work.

From the above, we could define engaged employee, in layman’s terms, as one who is very much in love with their job and always willing to go the extra mile for the same. This cannot be dictated in the employment contract, but has to be offered by the employee willingly (CIPD, 2021).

The benefits of having an engaged workforce is multifaceted. The most obvious ones would be increased satisfaction and commitment amongst employees, and less motivation to consider leaving the firm ( Demerouti et al, 2001). Engaged employees are always willing to learn (Sonnentag, 2003). Such employees are also willing to go beyond their ordinary duties and perform, and this enables the business to better serve its customers (Salanova, Agut & Peiró, 2003). Engagement makes employees happier and improves their performance (Schaufeli, Taris & Van Rhenen, 2003). In essence, it acts as the mediating factor between the resources at the organisation’s disposal and the organization’s ability to utilise said resources (Salanova et al, 2003).

Bailey et al (2013) states that factors such as job challenge (overcoming such challenges improves an employee as a better worker and person), autonomy (employees need to be free to work in a fashion that is conducive to them within the organizational framework), variety (being exposed to different kinds of tasks and responsibilities keeps an employee engaged), feedback (timely feedback on the performance of an employee would enable the employee to plan, improve and work accordingly) and fit (the work environment needs to be one that is compatible with the individual in question). Robinson, Perryman and Hayday (2004) summarize the above by stating that employees need to feel that they are valued, and involved.

References

Bailey, C., Delbridge, R., Alfes, K. And Shantz, A. (2013) Employee Engagement in Theory and Practice | Request PDF. Routledge. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262313406_Employee_Engagement_in_Theory_and_Practice (Accessed: 26 December 2021).

CIPD. 2021. Employee Relations | Factsheets | CIPD. [online] Available at: https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/fundamentals/relations/employees/factsheet#gref [Accessed 23 December 2021]

Demerouti, E., Bakker, A.B., Janssen, P.P.M. & Schaufeli, W.B. (2001). Burnout and engagement at work as a function of demands and control. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 27, 279-286.

Mike Emmott , (2015),”Employment relations over the last 50 years: confrontation, consensus or neglect?”, Employee Relations, Vol. 37 Iss 6 pp. 658 – 669

Robinson, D., Perryman, S. And Hayday, S. (2004) The Drivers of Employee Engagement, Report 408. Available at: http://www.employment-studies.co.uk [Accessed on: 26 December 2021]

Salanova, M., Agut, S., & Pieró, J.M. (2003). Linking organizational facilitators and work engagement to extrarole performance and customer loyalty : The mediating role of service climate. Submitted for publication.

Schaufeli, W.B., Taris, T.W., & Van Rhenen, W. (2003). Workaholism, burnout and engagement: Three of a kind or three different kinds of employee well-being? Submitted for publication.

Shaufeli, Wilmar. Bakker, Arnold. 2004. WORK ENGAGEMENT MANUAL. 1st Ed. [online]. Accessed via: https://www.wilmarschaufeli.nl/publications/Schaufeli/Test%2520Manuals/Test_manual_UWES_English.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjBlpqQsoH1AhXrT2wGHaGsDngQFnoECAQQAQ&usg=AOvVaw27fY3f5T8QZ2k5o6GhkKkV [Accessed on: 26 December 2021].

Sonnentag, S. (2003). Recovery, work engagement, and proactive behavior (2003): A new Look at the interface between non-work and work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 518-528.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Employment relations in the modern context

Traditionally, trade unions have played a pivotal role in employee relations. And this was understandable at a time when the interests and the parties involved were working with relatively straightforward frameworks (Musson, 2006). But today, the relationship between the various parties have become much more complex, focussing on many issues. The negotiations are no longer just about wages and working hours. Even the previously underrepresented interest groups (ex: women, immigrants) have now entered the scene, creating the need for a more complex and inclusive approach towards employee relations (CIPD, 2021). Rightfully, this has caused a decline in the popularity of trade unions. They are no-longer the go-to representatives of the workers. If anything, this has led to a more individualised approach towards employee relations. The steady decline in industrial action is also a proof of the above (Nowak and Hodder, 2019). The change from the relatively simplistic and somewhat dichotomou...
Read more

Psychological Contract

“The concept of the psychological contract, with its focus on the exchange of perceived promises and commitments, is increasingly used as a framework to study the employment relationship (Guest & Conway, 2002).” Armstrong (2014) describes psychological conract as an unwritten and understood set of mutual expectations that exist between employees and employers. Echoing the same, Herriot & Pemberton (1997) describe it as the attitude of employees and employers towards the reciprocal promises and obligations implied in their relationship. Rousseau & McLean Parks (1993) further add that the reciprocal nature of this relationship is of great importance. Guest and Conway (2002) further state that effective organizational communication can facilitate the creation of a more explicit and effective psychological contract. Robinson & Morrison (2000) also point out how important it is to communicate the particulars of the psychological contract at the...
Read more

Pluralist Perspective

Further to the points discussed in the previous post, Armstrong (2014) states that the employer and employees will not necessarily see eye-to-eye on many issues and that the unitary worldview is naive for believing so. Shaw, McPhail and Ressia (2018) further assert this by stating that the pluralist approach views employment as a strategic relationship between two unrelated parties or groups with diverse goals. Johnstone & Ackers, (2015) whilst agreeing that the pluralist approach does assume that employers and employees have diverse viewpoints, also add that this approach allows room for cooperation in the form of representative participation. Farnham and Pimlot (1990) went further and added that the very purpose of employment relations is to resolve the conflicts that could arise among various parties of interest in the industrial context. Johnstone and Wilkinson (2013) summarize that the fundamental idea here is that the management, unions and workers can work together to achiev...
Read more