International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 8, Issue 2 (February 2021), Pages: 6-16

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

 Title: Understanding work engagement through multi-level investigations: From antecedents to outcomes

 Author(s): Muhammad Ali Hamza 1, Saqib Rehman 2, *, Adnan Sarwar 1, Annie Shoukat 1

 Affiliation(s):

 1Department of Economics and Business Management, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences (UVAS), Lahore, Pakistan
 2Department of Management Sciences, Lahore College for Women University (LCWU), Lahore, Pakistan

  Full Text - PDF          XML

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6307-7978

 Digital Object Identifier: 

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2021.02.002

 Abstract:

Work engagement is a valuable organizational resource, and it has many positive outcomes. In today’s dynamic and competitive business environment, organizations can only be successful when they have an engaged workforce. The current study examines how supervisors support and fairness is important for employee’s work engagement and how the role of perceived organizational support is significant in an employee's workplace. In line with Organizational Support Theory (OST) and Conservation of Resource Theory (CRT), the current study is an empirical attempt to explain antecedents that could increase work engagement and resultantly fetch productivity and profit in the context of South Asia (the case of Pakistan) by considering the outcomes. This cross-sectional study draws data through structured questionnaires from 310 employees of eight mega retail stores by using simple random sampling. The outcomes of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) analysis revealed a positive effect of supervisors’ support and organizational fairness on work engagement through the mediation of Perceived Organizational Support (POS) and explained the impact of work engagement on task performance and career satisfaction of employees. The current study tested the model for work engagement; future research might test the model using other employee factors (employee sustainability or motivation) in order to test continuous employee behaviors in their workplaces. 

 © 2020 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords: Work engagement, Perceived organizational support, Fairness, Supervisor support, Career satisfaction, Task performance

 Article History: Received 1 June 2020, Received in revised form 23 August 2020, Accepted 11 September 2020

 Acknowledgment:

No Acknowledgment.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

  Hamza MA, Rehman S, and Sarwar A et al. (2021). Understanding work engagement through multi-level investigations: From antecedents to outcomes. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 8(2): 6-16

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 Fig. 1 Fig. 2

 Tables

 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 

----------------------------------------------

 References (72)

  1. Abbas W and Wu W (2018). Employee engagement, fairness and trust: An empirical assessment. Human Systems Management, 37(3): 287-297. https://doi.org/10.3233/HSM-17182   [Google Scholar]
  2. Afacan MMF (2015). Exploring the consequences of work engagement: Relations among OCB-I, LMX and team work performance. Ege Academic Review, 15(2): 229-238. https://doi.org/10.21121/eab.2015217988   [Google Scholar]
  3. Alarcon GM, Edwards JM, and Menke LE (2011). Student burnout and engagement: A test of the conservation of resources theory. The Journal of Psychology, 145(3): 211-227. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2011.555432   [Google Scholar] PMid:21560805
  4. Al-Zu'bi HA (2010). A study of relationship between organizational justice and job satisfaction. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(12): 102-109. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v5n12p102   [Google Scholar]
  5. Andrew OC and Sofian S (2012). Individual factors and work outcomes of employee engagement. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 40: 498-508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.03.222   [Google Scholar]
  6. Bakker AB and Albrecht S (2018). Work engagement: Current trends. Career Development International, 23(1): 4-11. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-11-2017-0207   [Google Scholar]
  7. Bakker AB and Demerouti E (2008). Towards a model of work engagement. Career Development International, 13(3): 209-223. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620430810870476   [Google Scholar]
  8. Bano S, Ramzan S, Anjum MA, and Dapeng L (2017). Does perceived social support mediate the relationship of perceived organizational support and job satisfaction? A structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Managerial Sciences, 3: 105-118.   [Google Scholar]
  9. Baran BE, Shanock LR, and Miller LR (2012). Advancing organizational support theory into the twenty-first century world of work. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27(2): 123-147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-011-9236-3   [Google Scholar]
  10. Barclay LJ, Skarlicki DP, and Pugh SD (2005). Exploring the role of emotions in injustice perceptions and retaliation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(4): 629-643. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.629   [Google Scholar] PMid:16060783
  11. Barsky A, Kaplan SA, and Beal DJ (2011). Just feelings? The role of affect in the formation of organizational fairness judgments. Journal of Management, 37(1): 248-279. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310376325   [Google Scholar]
  12. Bersin J (2015). Becoming irresistible: A new model for employee engagement. Deloitte Review, 16: 146-163.   [Google Scholar]
  13. Bies RJ (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In: Bies RJ, Lewicki RJ, and Sheppard BH (Eds.), Research on negotiations in organizations: 43-55. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK.   [Google Scholar]
  14. Biswas S, Varma A, and Ramaswami A (2013). Linking distributive and procedural justice to employee engagement through social exchange: A field study in India. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(8): 1570-1587. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.725072   [Google Scholar]
  15. Bothma FC and Roodt G (2012). Work-based identity and work engagement as potential antecedents of task performance and turnover intention: Unravelling a complex relationship. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 38(1): 27-44. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v38i1.893   [Google Scholar]
  16. Burke MJ, Borucki CC, and Hurley AE (1992). Reconceptualizing psychological climate in a retail service environment: A multiple-stakeholder perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(5): 717-729. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.77.5.717   [Google Scholar]
  17. Chen T, Li F, and Leung K (2016). When does supervisor support encourage innovative behavior? Opposite moderating effects of general self‐efficacy and internal locus of control. Personnel Psychology, 69(1): 123-158. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12104   [Google Scholar]
  18. Chou SY and Stauffer JM (2016). A theoretical classification of helping behavior and helping motives. Personnel Review, 45(5): 871-888. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-03-2015-0076   [Google Scholar]
  19. Colquitt JA, Conlon DE, Wesson MJ, Porter CO, and Ng KY (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3): 425-445. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.425   [Google Scholar] PMid:11419803
  20. Dajani MAZ (2015). The impact of employee engagement on job performance and organisational commitment in the Egyptian banking sector. Journal of Business and Management Sciences, 3(5): 138-147.   [Google Scholar]
  21. Demerouti E, Bakker AB, Nachreiner F, and Schaufeli WB (2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3): 499-512. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499   [Google Scholar] PMid:11419809
  22. Eisenberger R, Fasolo P, and Davis-LaMastro V (1990). Perceived organizational support and employee diligence, commitment, and innovation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(1): 51-59. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.75.1.51   [Google Scholar]
  23. Eisenberger R, Huntington R, Hutchison S, and Sowa D (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3): 500-507. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.500   [Google Scholar]
  24. Eldor L and Harpaz I (2016). A process model of employee engagement: The learning climate and its relationship with extra‐role performance behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(2): 213-235. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2037   [Google Scholar]
  25. Engelbrecht AP (2006). Fundamentals of computational swarm intelligence. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  26. Folger R and Cropanzano R (2001). Fairness theory: Justice as accountability. In: Greenberg J (Ed.), Advances in Organizational Justice: 1-55. Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  27. GC (2017). State of the global workplace. Gallup Company, Gallup Press Location, Washington, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  28. GC (2018). The engaged workplace. Gallup Company, Gallup Press Location, Washington, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  29. Graen GB and Scandura TA (1987). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing. Research in Organizational Behavior, 9: 175-208.   [Google Scholar]
  30. Greenberg J (1987). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of Management Review, 12(1): 9-22. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1987.4306437   [Google Scholar]
  31. Greenhaus JH, Parasuraman S, and Wormley WM (1990). Effects of race on organizational experiences, job performance evaluations, and career outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 33(1): 64-86. https://doi.org/10.5465/256352   [Google Scholar]
  32. Griffin G, Holub A, and Perona P (2007). Caltech-256 object category dataset. California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  33. Hair JF, Hult GTM, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M, and Thiele KO (2017). Mirror, mirror on the wall: A comparative evaluation of composite-based structural equation modeling methods. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(5): 616-632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-017-0517-x   [Google Scholar]
  34. Hair JF, Sarstedt M, Ringle CM, and Mena JA (2012). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(3): 414-433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0261-6   [Google Scholar]
  35. Hobfoll SE (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested‐self in the stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. Applied Psychology, 50(3): 337-421. https://doi.org/10.1111/1464-0597.00062   [Google Scholar]
  36. Hofmann DA and Morgeson FP (1999). Safety-related behavior as a social exchange: The role of perceived organizational support and leader–member exchange. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(2): 286-296. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.84.2.286   [Google Scholar]
  37. Kahn WA (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4): 692-724. https://doi.org/10.5465/256287   [Google Scholar]
  38. Kowske B (2012). Employee engagement: Market review, buyer’s guide and provider profiles. Bersin and Associates, Oakland, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  39. Krehbiel PJ and Cropanzano R (2000). Procedural justice, outcome favorability and emotion. Social Justice Research, 13(4): 339-360. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007670909889   [Google Scholar]
  40. Kunnan AJ (2004). Test fairness. In: Milanovic M and Weir CJ (Eds.), European language testing in a global context: 27-48. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.   [Google Scholar]
  41. Kurtessis JN, Eisenberger R, Ford MT, Buffardi LC, Stewart KA, and Adis CS (2017). Perceived organizational support: A meta-analytic evaluation of organizational support theory. Journal of Management, 43(6): 1854-1884. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315575554   [Google Scholar]
  42. Latham GP and Pinder CC (2005). Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Psychology, 56: 485-516. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142105   [Google Scholar] PMid:15709944
  43. Levinson H (1965). The relation between man and organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 9(6): 61-685. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391032   [Google Scholar]
  44. Locke EA (1969). What is job satisfaction? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4(4): 309-336. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(69)90013-0   [Google Scholar]
  45. Loi R, Chan KW, and Lam LW (2014). Leader–member exchange, organizational identification, and job satisfaction: A social identity perspective. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 87(1): 42-61. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12028   [Google Scholar]
  46. London M (1993). Relationships between career motivation, empowerment and support for career development. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 66(1): 55-69. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1993.tb00516.x   [Google Scholar]
  47. Mann A and Harter J (2016). The worldwide employee engagement crisis. Gallup Business Journal, 7: 1-5.   [Google Scholar]
  48. Marzano RJ, Pickering D, and McTighe J (1993). Assessing student outcomes: Performance assessment using the dimensions of learning model. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  49. McCrae RR, Kurtz JE, Yamagata S, and Terracciano A (2011). Internal consistency, retest reliability, and their implications for personality scale validity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15(1): 28-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868310366253   [Google Scholar] PMid:20435807 PMCid:PMC2927808
  50. Newman DA and Harrison DA (2008). Been there, bottled that: Are state and behavioral work engagement new and useful construct “wines”? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1(1): 31-35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2007.00003.x   [Google Scholar]
  51. Ng TW and Sorensen KL (2008). Toward a further understanding of the relationships between perceptions of support and work attitudes: A meta-analysis. Group and Organization Management, 33(3): 243-268. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601107313307   [Google Scholar]
  52. Nikolova I, Schaufeli W, and Notelaers G (2019). Engaging leader–Engaged employees? A cross-lagged study on employee engagement. European Management Journal, 37(6): 772-783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2019.02.004   [Google Scholar]
  53. Ram P and Prabhakar GV (2011). The role of employee engagement in work-related outcomes. Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business, 1(3): 47-61.   [Google Scholar]
  54. Rhoades L and Eisenberger R (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4): 698-714. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.698   [Google Scholar] PMid:12184574
  55. Rich BL, Lepine JA, and Crawford ER (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3): 617-635. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.51468988   [Google Scholar]
  56. Salanova M, Llorens S, and García-Renedo M (2003). ¿Por qué se están «quemando» los profesores?. Prevención, Trabajo y Salud. Revista del INSHT, 28: 16-20.   [Google Scholar]
  57. Schaufeli WB and Bakker AB (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi‐sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 25(3): 293-315. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.248   [Google Scholar]
  58. Schaufeli WB, Bakker AB, and Salanova M (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4): 701-716. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282471   [Google Scholar]
  59. Schaufeli WB, Salanova M, González-Romá V, and Bakker AB (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1): 71-92. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015630930326   [Google Scholar]
  60. Scott DR (1941). The basis for accounting principles. The Accounting Review, 16(4): 341-349.   [Google Scholar]
  61. Shaver KH and Lacey LM (2003). Job and career satisfaction among staff nurses: Effects of job setting and environment. JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration, 33(3): 166-172. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005110-200303000-00008   [Google Scholar] PMid:12629304
  62. Shaw EC, Munday PL, and McNeil BI (2013). The role of CO2 variability and exposure time for biological impacts of ocean acidification. Geophysical Research Letters, 40(17): 4685-4688. https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50883   [Google Scholar]
  63. Shemwell JT, Chase CC, and Schwartz DL (2015). Seeking the general explanation: A test of inductive activities for learning and transfer. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(1): 58-83. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21185   [Google Scholar]
  64. Stinglhamber F and Vandenberghe C (2003). Organizations and supervisors as sources of support and targets of commitment: A longitudinal study. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 24(3): 251-270. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.192   [Google Scholar]
  65. Swanberg JE, McKechnie SP, Ojha MU, and James JB (2011). Schedule control, supervisor support and work engagement: A winning combination for workers in hourly jobs? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79(3): 613-624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2011.04.012   [Google Scholar]
  66. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS, and Ullman JB (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Pearson, Boston, MA, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  67. Tabibnia G, Satpute AB, and Lieberman MD (2008). The sunny side of fairness: Preference for fairness activates reward circuitry (and disregarding unfairness activates self-control circuitry). Psychological Science, 19(4): 339-347. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02091.x   [Google Scholar] PMid:18399886
  68. Ulrich D (1997). Human resource champions. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  69. Wang HJ, Lu CQ, and Siu OL (2015). Job insecurity and job performance: The moderating role of organizational justice and the mediating role of work engagement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(4): 1249-1258. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038330   [Google Scholar] PMid:25402953
  70. Wayne SJ, Liden RC, Kraimer ML, and Graf IK (1999). The role of human capital, motivation and supervisor sponsorship in predicting career success. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20(5): 577-595. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199909)20:5<577::AID-JOB958>3.0.CO;2-0   [Google Scholar]
  71. Weiss HM, Suckow K, and Cropanzano R (1999). Effects of justice conditions on discrete emotions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(5): 786-794. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.84.5.786   [Google Scholar]
  72. Yang F, Liu J, Huang X, Qian J, Wang T, Wang Z, and Yu H (2018). How supervisory support for career development relates to subordinate work engagement and career outcomes: The moderating role of task proficiency. Human Resource Management Journal, 28(3): 496-509. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12194   [Google Scholar]