Introduction – Origin and Evolution
Employee Engagement is a relatively new term in the concepts of Human Resource Management practices. The term was first noted by Kahn (1990). Khan (1990, p. 700) defined engagement as ‘the simultaneous employment and expression of a person's "preferred self" in task behaviors that promote connections to work and to others, personal presence (physical, cognitive and emotional), and active, full role performance’. In summary, engagement is defined as bringing one’s personal skills and interests to the job.
During
the time period of 1963 to 1980, the Social Issue era, personal management was transformed
to human resources (Tubey, Rotich & Kurgat, 2015). During this era of 70’s
and 80’s organizations looked at employee satisfaction from the perspective of employee
without trying to identify the relationship of the employee with the organization
and then focus was changed from satisfaction to commitment (Chandel, 2018). However,
with the Technological advancement era (Tubey, Rotich & Kurgat, 2015), where
globalization a force to reckoned, with rapid technological advancements,
change of economy from manufacturing to service sector both employers and organizations
had to change their way of work and mentality. For employees their existing
jobs were either no longer available or their skills no longer valid, and they
were required to acquire the skills and move for better opportunities. This
made organizations lose their people rapidly which was costing them money for
new hires and affecting the organizations ability to effectively compete in the
market (Chandel, 2018).
Thus, the concept of employee engagement matured, where it was identified, engaged employees are an important asset to any organization for its sustainability and successfulness (Chandel, 2018)
Definition
Employee engagement does not have a single definition. Each party; Organizations, Institutes and Scholars have conceptualized engagement in various ways. The concept has developed over a period of 28 years; therefore, it is difficult to find two parties defining it the same way (Smith & Markwick, 2009).
Following examples will provide an understanding of how different organizations view employee engagement, where the concept is put into practice.
Smith & Markwick (2009, p.7), Dell refers to being engaged as ‘giving time and talent to team building activities’
Smith & Markwick (2009, p. 7), Johnson and Johnson define employee engagement as ‘the degree to which employees are satisfied with their jobs, feel valued, and experience collaboration and trust. Engaged employees will stay with the company longer and continually find smarter, more effective ways to add value to the organization. The end result is a high performing company where people are flourishing, and productivity is increased and sustained’
Following definition as proposed by a professional body:
Smith & Markwick (2009, p. 12), the CIPD suggests engagement ‘is a combination of commitment to the organization and its values plus a willingness to help out colleagues (organizational citizenship). It goes beyond job satisfaction and is not simply motivation. Engagement is something the employee has to offer: it cannot be ‘required’ as part of the employment contract’.
Scholars have provided different definitions for the term employee engagement as stated in table 1.0
Table 1.0:
Definitions of Employee Engagement by Different Researchers
As such
it could be stated that the best fit or a definitive definition for the model
engagement has not been agreed upon in the literature (Smith & Markwick,
2009).
Uptake of Employee Engagement by
Organizations
The most common and one of the best method’s used by organizations to measure engagement is employee surveys and having regular employee surveys is considered a High-performance HR practice. Facebook’s internal research team acclaims three reasons as to why it would be a big mistake to abandon conducting employee surveys (Judd, O'Rourke & Grant, 2018).
- Employee behaviors can be predicted
- Employees get the feeling of being heard
- Surveys are tool’s to bring in change of behaviors
Organizations believe that having engaged employees is the key to success. FastTrack 360 research findings states ‘71% of Executives cite, employee engagement as critical to their company’s success’. In Gallup’s State of the Global Workplace report indicates, in today’s organizations 85% employees are not engaged in the work place thus making engaged employees as a challenge seen globally (Jouany& Mäkipää, 2020).
As shown in figure 1.0, in the US labor market nearly two out of five (38%) HR professionals said maintaining high levels of employee engagement is currently their organization’s greatest human capital challenge, and one out of five (20%) said it would remain the greatest challenge for the next 10 years to come. Table 2.0 indicates on research done for few countries, where employee engagement has also become a priority in which most urgent action is required. (SHRM Research Overview: Employee Engagement, 2016).
Figure 1.0:
Organizations Greatest Human Capital Challenges (HR Professionals views)
(Source: SHRM Research Overview: Employee Engagement, 2016, p.7)
Table 2.0:
Urgency Ranking of Selected HR Subtopics by Country
(Source: SHRM Research Overview: Employee Engagement,
2016, p.7)
References
Chandel, P (2018) ‘The Evolution of Employee Engagement:
A Unique Construct’, International Journal of Human Resource Management and
Research (IJHRMR), vol 8, issue 6, pp. 199-216, viewed 15th October
2020,
<http://www.tjprc.org/publishpapers/2-34-1545628595-22.IJHRMRDEC201822.pdf>
Jouany,
V & Mäkipää, M (2020), 8 Employee engagement statistics you need to know in
2020, Smarp blog , weblog post Aug 11 2020, viewed 17th October 2020
,
< https://blog.smarp.com/employee-engagement-8-statistics-you-need-to-know>
Judd, S , O'Rourke, E & Grant, A (2018) ‘Employee Surveys
are Still One of the Best Ways to Measure
Engagement’ , Harvard Business Review, viewed 18th October 2020,
<https://hbr.org/2018/03/employee-surveys-are-still-one-of-the-best-ways-to-measure-engagement>
Kahn, WA (1990) ‘Psychological Conditions of Personal
Engagement and Disengagement at Work’, The Academy of Management Journal, vol.
33, no.04, pp. 692–724, viewed 17th October 2020
SHRM Research Overview: Employee Engagement,
2016, Society for Human Resource Management, viewed 17th October
2020,
Smith, GR & Markwick, C. (2009) ‘Employee Engagement:
A review of current thinking’, report 469, Institute for Employment Studies, viewed
17th October 2020,
<https://www.employment-studies.co.uk/resource/employee-engagement-review-current-thinking>
Tubey, R, Rotich, KJ & Kurgat, A (2015) ‘History, Evolution and Development of Human Resource Management: A Contemporary Perspective’, European Journal of Business and Management, vol 7, no.9 , viewed 17th October 2020
Thanks
ReplyDeleteHi Sonali, I would like to add to Gallups State of the Global Workplace which reported on employee engagement in more than 140 countries. The statistics were quite concerning as Gallup found that 87% of the workers (worldwide) and 70% of the employees in the U.S are either not engaged or actively disengaged which statistically shows us that only 30% of the U.S workers are responsible for driving their organizations forward. Gallup also found that the actively disengaged employees cost the U.S billions of dollars per annum while the “not engaged” employees have not even been considered in these calculations.
ReplyDeleteHi Melissa, Yes the statistics are quite alarming. In Gallup (2017), State of the global workplace report only 15% of employees worldwide are engaged. This brings us a very valid point to ponder as the chairman and CEO of Gallup Jim Clifton highlights "What if we doubled that? What if we tripled it? Imagine how quickly that would fix global GDP, productivity and hence, human development."
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis is further established by the latest Gallup (2020), Mete analysis brief on Employee Engagement and Team performance report. This sated having highly engaged teams would result in fewer negative outcomes, more positive and greater success for the organization. Some examples; for organizations with a low turnover rate, this further improved by 43%, while sales increased by 18% and profitability for the organization increased by 23% (Gallup, 2020).
Delete‘’Employee engagement is about drawing out a deeper commitment from our employees so fewer leave, sick absence reduces, accident rates decline, conflicts and grievances go down, productivity increases’’ (Engage for Success, n.d).
DeleteThis is further established by the latest Gallup (2020), Mete analysis brief on Employee Engagement and Team performance report. This sated having highly engaged teams would result in fewer negative outcomes, more positive and greater success for the organization. Some examples; for organizations with a low turnover rate, this further improved by 43%, while sales increased by 18% and profitability for the organization increased by 23% (Gallup, 2020).
DeleteYes Madura, Alfes et al (2010), has defined engagement focusing more on job role and task rather than academic definitions. In simple terms, it’s Thinking, Feeling and Acting. As cited by Lewis, R, Feilder, ED & Tharani, T (2017), ‘Being focused in what you do (thinking), feeling good about yourself in your role and the organization (feeling), and acting in a way that demonstrates commitment to the organizational values and objectives (acting)', could be described as an engaged employee.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteYes, this is as khan (1990) suggested for engagement in simple terms. Eldor & Harpaz (2015), stated that engagement is multidimensional where an engaged employee is engaged emotionally, physically, and cognitively. Engagement is a two-way process, where organizations are responsible for creating a meaningful workplace for employees and employees in turn must contribute to the organizations success (Osborne & Hammoud, 2017).
DeleteHi Sonali, I would like to add-up further that, Employee engagement is one of the main problems that each organization tries to maintain among their employees and trying to ensure that employees put their hundred percent of effort in their tasks. It is of great interest in each organization in order to successfully compete with their competitors. Previous studies have stated that prediction can be made on the outcomes of employees’ performance, financial flow and stability, and also the achievement of organizational success (Bates, 2004; Harter et al.,2002; and Richman,2006).
ReplyDeleteHi Malithra, the reason why organizations find employee engagement as a major problem is, globally the engagement levels are very low. According to the Gallup (2017), State of the Global Workplace report 85% of employee are either not engaged or actively disengaged and Beheshti (2019), stated disengaged employees cost US companies $550 billion per year. Therefore, it could be suggested that organizations must look for reasons of disengagement and correct them to solve this issue.
DeleteHi Sonali, According to Reilly and Brown (2008) noted that the terms‘job satisfaction’, ‘motivation’ and ‘commitment’ are generally being replaced now in business by‘engagement’ because it appears to have more descriptive force and face validity.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteHi Ranga, adding to what you have stated Engagement is considered to have 3 overlapping components; commitment, motivation and organizational citizenship. As produced by the Institute for Employment Studies this was called the ‘IES model of employee engagement’ and all 3 components combined will develop an engaged employee (Armstrong & Taylor, 2014)
DeleteHi Sonali, Employee engagement is the extent to which employees feel passionate about their jobs, are committed to the organization and put discretionary effort in to their work. Alfes et al (2010) saw engagement as having three core facets; (1 )Intellectual engagement – thinking hard about the job and how to do it better; (2) Affective engagement – feeling positively about doing a good job; (3) Social engagement – actively taking opportunities to discuss work-related
ReplyDeleteimprovements with others at work
Hi Himasha, the 3-dimensional approach of engagement defined by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development which is Intellectual, Affective and Social may not be suitable for some organizations, job roles and employees. As an example; for a worker who does repetitive work in manufacturing, the job will not evoke intellectual engagement nor will the worker seek intellectual engagement from it. Thus, it could be stated in such circumstances the other dimensions have a substitutionary role in overall engagement (The Insights Group Ltd, 2014).
DeleteEmployee engagement is one of the emerging concepts that
ReplyDeletewill address multiple challenges organizations are facing
such as attrition, customer loyalty, customer satisfaction,
profitability, and business productivity (Gallup 2013, Macey
et al., 2009).
Yes Janaka, based on the latest study by Gallup on Employee engagement and performance, it is was identified, by having highly engaged business units or teams, organization improved customer loyalty by 10%, profitability by 23% and productivity by 14%. Therefore, investing on engagement is definitely worth it (Gallup, 2020).
DeleteHi Sonali, here are some other facts relating to your post, that is about general behavioral aspects can be recognized in engaged employees of an organization which help to improve organizational performance. Engaged employees always advocate for the organization to co-workers, and direct potential employees and customers. Those employees have a strong desire to be a member of the organization, even when there are opportunities to work elsewhere. Also engaged employees take extra time, effort and initiative to contribute to the success of the business (Baumruk and Gorman, 2006)
ReplyDeleteHi Eranga, this is exactly the reason why organizations love the concept of employee engagement. However, organization must take note to provide the right conditions for the employees to work, if not even though the employees are engaged the organization would not be able to gain the maximum value of it (The Insights Group Ltd, 2014).
DeleteEmployee engagement is a different and incomparable theory which is a collection of knowledge, emotion and behavior (Saks, 2006). Cha (2007) defined employee engagement as the employee’s active participation in work and the shape of full physiology, cognition, and emotion that attend the work engagement, including three dimensions of work engagement, organizational identification, and sense of work value.
ReplyDeleteTure, engagement has been defined in many ways. For example, CIPD (2012) stated engagement as 'a practitioners umbrella concept for capturing the various means by which employers can elicit additional or discretionary effort from employees – a willingness on the part of staff to work beyond a contract' (Armstrong & Taylor, 2014).
DeleteKahn (1990), the first to point out on employee engagement has comprehended it as the way in which people can “use varying degrees of themselves – physically, cognitively and emotionally in work role performance”. In essence, it can be put into words as how employees are emotionally committed to their organization which would eventually contribute to achieve organization’s success. Engaged employees are said to be dedicated, productive, enthusiastic, accountable and at the same time result focused (Allen 2014).
ReplyDeleteSimilarly when an employee is disengaged, it impacts the quality of work is declined, absenteeism is high, are withdrawn from discussions and exhibits complacence (Forbes Human Resources Council, 2018).
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhile agreeing your statement wish to add according to Robertson-Smith and Markwick,(2009) Organization can reduce the staff turnover rate, while increasing the employee effectiveness and productivity level by having a proper employee engagement strategies.
ReplyDeleteYes Sohan, with it is proven that with enhanced engagement rates, staff turnover can be greatly improved. Analysis indicates that if your organization has a turnover rate of more than 40% annually, with improved engagement this could be reduced by 18% and if the turnover rate is less than 40%, it could be reduced by 43% (Gallup Meta Analysis, 2020).
DeleteEmployee engagement is today seen as a powerful source of competitive advantage in the turbulent times. Specifically three divers, namely communication, work life balance and leadership are impact the level of employee performance and wellbeing at workplace of the employees (Bedarkar,2014)
ReplyDeleteleadership plays a major role in engagement. According to the survey conducted by Tower Watson (2012), leadership is one of the key drivers that impact engagement.
DeleteRobinson et al (2004) define employee engagement as “a positive attitude held by the employee towards the organization and its value. An engaged employee is aware of business context, and works with colleagues to improve performance within the job for the benefit of the organization. The organization must work to develop and nurture engagement, which requires a two-way relationship between employer and employee.”
ReplyDeleteprecisely, having a strong two-way communication is vital before we even think of engaging staff. This is considered as a building block that has to be in place, if not engagement efforts taken by the organization would be futile (Robinson, Perryman & Hayday, 2004).
ReplyDeleteEmployee engagement can be simply explained as one's interest and commitment towards one's job (Kular et al, 2008). Also, Robinson et al (2004) explains the concept as one's commitment towards the job and company which results from positive attitudes.
ReplyDeleteOver the years that engagement has been present there have been many definitions for employee engagement. However they all share these common elements:
ReplyDelete1. Feel satisfaction with their work
2. Take pride in their organization
3. Enjoy and believe in their work
4. Understand the link between their job and the organization’s mission
5. Feel valued by their employer
6. Fully commit to their employer and their role
7. Exert extra effort to contribute to business success
(SHRM Foundation Executive Briefing, 2012)
Employee engagement is the passionate responsibility employees feel towards their organization and the moves they make to guarantee the organization's success and prosperity. Engaged employees exhibit care, commitment, eagerness, responsibility and are results oriented ( SHRM, 2014).
ReplyDeleteWhat you have stated is correct and definitions for employee engagement range from brief to concise to descriptive and detailed. Also it must be noted that many of these definitions emphasize some aspect of an employee's commitment to the organization or the positive behaviors an engaged employee exhibits (SHRM, TOOLKITS).
Delete