The above presented short literature review on the topic of employee engagement reflects to a great extend individual’s experiences in a workplace environment. The theory of employee engagement is viewed by the individual as an analytical tool that provides explanation as well as deeper understanding of the willingness and ability to contribute to organisational success. It is important not only because is provides general sense and explanation of the phenomenon but also because it identifies a distinct set of observations about the underlying reality of engagement at work.
Motivation to engage and feel fully involved and enthusiastic about author’s job and organization was clearly explained by the theory of Kahn (1990). Psychological factors such as meaningfulness, safety and availability are crucial in workplace practice in order to be fully engaged. For example, meaningful work gave the individual an opportunity to use range of abilities, which created better fit, interest and more challenging work environment.
Furthermore, rewarding co-workers, constant feedback and positive relationships characterized by trust and mutual development provided safety and healthy organizational culture. Consequently, accomplishment of individual’s goals and successful completion of organizational tasks was facilitated what brought satisfaction and positive attitude towards work. In turn, engaging attitude and motivation occurred what was described by the aspect of job resources investigated by Bakker and Demerouti (2008).
Also availability of other resources such as support and coaching provided the individual with growth opportunities. Engagement level significantly rose when organization offered a formal career development system that included components such as formal career tracks, mobility systems to help the individual move about in the organization, and annual career conversations. This resulted in a willingness to put more effort into the work. Further explanation of work engagement of the individual can be found in the theory of social exchange.
By understanding how individual’s job fits into the big picture of the organization and by clarifying what are the competencies, helped the individual to upgrade the skills to match the needs of the future and bring value to the organization. By being appraised and rewarded for work the individual felt obliged to respond in kind and repay the organization. In conclusion, the theory of employee engagement provides an important insight into building an organizational culture with satisfied and engaged employees.
It helps the organization to achieve more with less, move faster at the same time as improving quality and customer service without increasing costs. As they do this they realize that what makes the difference is not just strong brands, state-of-the-art technology, new products or new markets. Increasingly organizations realize that they also need to inspire their employees to go the extra mile and feel passionate about the future of their company. They need to motivate them to exert maximum effort, deploy maximum intelligence, and apply maximum creativity in their work for the benefit of the organization as a whole.
Bakker, A. B. and Demerouti, E. (2007), “The job demands-resources model: state of the art”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 22, pp. 309-28. Bakker A. B. and Demerouti, E. (2008), “Towards a model of work engagement”, Carrer Development Internationl, Vol. 13, pp. 209-223. Britt, T. W. , Adler, A. B. , & Bartone, P. T. (2001). Deriving benefits from stressful events: The role of engagement in meaningful work and hardiness. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 53–63. Hakanen, J. , Bakker, A. B.
and Schaufeli, W. B. (2006), “Burnout and work engagement among teachers”, The Journal of School Psychology, Vol. 43, pp. 495-513. 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, 268–279. Kahn, W. A. (1990), “Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 33, pp. 692-724. Llorens, S. , Bakker, A. B.
, Schaufeli, W. B. and Salanova, M. (2006), “Testing the robustness of the job demands-resources model”, International Journal of Stress Management, Vol. 13, pp. 378-91. Luthans, F. , Norman, S. M. , Avolio, B. J. and Avey, J. B. (2008), “The mediating role of psychological capital in the supportive organizational climate: employee performance relationship”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 29, pp. 219-38. Maslach, C. , Schaufelli, W. B. and Leiter, M. P. (2001), “Job burnout”, A nnua l Revi ew of Psychology, Vol. 52, pp.
397-422. May, D. R. , Gilson, R. L. and 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, Vol. 77, pp. 11-37. Rothbard, N. P. (2001), “Enriching or depleting? The dynamics of engagement in work and family roles”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 46, pp. 655-84. Saks M. A. , (2006), “Antecedents and Consequences of employee engagement”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol.
21, pp. 600-619. 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, Vol. 25, pp. 293-315. Schaufeli, W. B. , Salanova, M. , Gonzalez-Roma, V. and Bakker, A. B. (2002), “The measurement of engagement and burnout: a two sample con? rmatory factor analytic approach”, Journal of Happiness Studies, Vol. 3, pp. 71-92. Schaufeli, W. B. and Salanova, M. (2007), “Work engagement: an emerging psychological concept