Employee engagement is significant because it determines an organization’s ability to make and maintain profitability. Research reveals a direct relationship between employee engagement and individual and organizational performance (Sun, 2019) . Currently, most organizations use employee engagement drivers for competitive advantage. This paper summarizes the article, A study on drivers of employee engagement impacting employee performance, a reaction to this work, and concludes by providing the merit and the significance of the article’s main points.
Summary
Thesis: Employees are strategic assets, and organizations should consider employee engagement techniques that meet employees’ expectations to improve organizational performance.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Theoretical Foundation
This work is based on the role theory that describes engagement as the impulsive involvement in a role. Furthermore, the article uses Csikszentmihayi’s flow concept, which posits that workers experience a holistic feeling when involved totally in their duties. Moreover, the authors use Kahn’s personal engagement concept that describes engagement as the process of harnessing employees to their roles. This concept postulates that engagement allows individuals to express their physical, emotional, and cognitive feelings when performing their roles. Personal engagement theory also suggests that three conditions, including psychological safety, psychological availability, and psychological safety, promote employee engagement. The theory hypothesizes that employees offer psychological safety to one another when performing their roles and relating among themselves. Employees also experience this condition when they have sufficient resources to perform their duties. They also feel safe psychologically when they consider their duties meaningful. Kahn’s theory also theorizes that employees experience psychological availability condition when they focus on their roles to improve their performances (Sun, 2019) . This article uses this theory as its theoretical foundation since it describes employee engagement as a multi-faceted concept.
Methodology
The article employs a systematic literature review. The authors sourced studies from internet searches and used journal databases on management. These databases include EBSCO, SCOPUS, Elsevier, and EMERALD. Moreover, the searches focused on the three main drivers of employee engagement, including leadership, communication, and work-life balance (Bedarkar & Pandita, 2014) .
Results
Bedarkar and Pandita (2014) found that while some studies had different employee engagement drivers, others had similar ideas. For instance, two studies identified contributions and connections as the drivers of employee engagement, while the other two studies identified communication as the drivers. Some of the other drivers identified by the authors include employee welfare, interpersonal relationships, career opportunities, organizational reputation, people focus, brand alignment, employee growth, job satisfaction, leadership, work-life balance, employee growth, and recognition.
Conclusion
The article concludes by emphasizing that organizations should make work responsibilities exciting and create working environments that promote engaged work life. The authors also recommend that organizations should integrate employee engagement into the organizational culture. They also remind organizations to focus on fulfilling employees’ expectations to improve organizational performance.
Reaction to the Work
The authors raise various issues related to internal communication. Bedarkar and Pandita (2014) mention that internal communication makes all workers understand organizational values, encouraging them to work towards organizational goals. Internal communication is crucial for organizational success since it helps employees understand the relationship between their roles and the organization's vision. According to Mishra et al. (2014) internal communication builds a transparency culture and engages workers in a company’s priorities. Most organizations utilize various communication techniques, such as face-to-face communication, to converse with workers. Communication is the lubricant that prevents organizations from self-destructing. Such techniques promote trust between employees and the management and support the engagement of the leadership with employees. Consequently, this aspect fosters a culture of employee engagement. Bedarkar and Pandita (2014) have similar sentiments by mentioning that internal communication promotes employee commitment, a sense of belonging, awareness of evolving organizational goals and transformations within the workplace.
Bedarkar and Pandita (2014) argue that leaders with poor communication strategies fail in employee engagement. Osborne and Hammoud (2017) also support this argument by stating that employees feel confident when leaders communicate to them and listen to their feedback. Workers also use communication techniques to raise issues regarding their roles. This aspect ensures that organizations address workers’ needs and concerns (Osborne & Hammoud, 2017) . Consequently, it results in employee empowerment, which is one of the drivers of employee engagement.
This article increases my understanding of the significance of employee engagement on organizational performance. Previously, I assumed that employee engagement depends on recognition and employee empowerment only. The article has made me realized that employee engagement depends on several factors. I now understand that leadership plays a vital role in promoting engagement since leadership behaviors determine motivation, organizational commitment, trust, and organizational behavior (Gözükara & Şimsek, 2016) . Leaders who support their employees entirely create an enabling environment, leading to employee engagement.
The material has also made me discover that employee engagement has a significant effect on organizational performance. Engagement makes employees invest in themselves, resulting in positive attitudes towards their responsibilities and the organization. This aspect positively impacts organizational performance since the employees will focus on individual and organizational performance.
The work changes my perspective on the employee engagement concept. I have always assumed that this issue is a trivial concept in management. Reading the article has transformed my thoughts and my attitude towards this subject. I will always focus on ensuring employee engagement in my leadership and management role. As a leader, I will be keen on employing transformational leadership to support employee engagement. Transformational leadership enhances a sense of security among employees, resulting in employee engagement (Saul et al., 2015). I will also consider authentic leadership to promote employee empowerment and a sense of belonging, which are drivers of employee engagement. Practicing ethical leadership will also help me create an ethical identity among employees to motivate them, stimulating employee engagement.
The authors also raise various aspects related to my life experiences. For instance, I once worked in a company where I discovered that highly engaged individuals outperformed others in strategic work areas. Furthermore, the authors mention that career opportunities influence employee engagement. I have worked in an organization that offers numerous career opportunities to its workers, and I realized that this move promotes employee engagement. These opportunities make employees understand their roles, motivating them to achieve individual and organizational objectives.
Conclusion
This article is a high-quality material and relevant to the current researches. It seeks to prove that specific factors influence employee engagement. It is also a scholarly journal with high standard research, and it was peer reviewed by the ICTMS organizing committee before publication.
This work raises various vital points. It helps organizations and leaders understand the drivers of employee engagement and the significance of considering these drivers. The article also emphasizes that organizations should make employee engagement a continuous process.
The material is accurate in the presentation of the main points. It uses other reliable studies to develop the major conclusions and provide recommendations. The material is also up-to-date since it uses both current and older sources on employee engagement and management.
The points highlighted are complete since the authors develop a model that shows how different aspects affect employee engagement.
The material is well organized and focused on the drivers of employee engagement. The authors make logical and clear arguments that are easy to understand. Although it focuses on a researchable topic, it is a review of previous studies.
The authors use sufficient quantity and relevant references with a consistent citation style. The material has a comprehensive bibliography of about 50 sources with both primary and secondary sources.
References
Bedarkar, M., & Pandita, D. (2014). A study on the drivers of employee engagement impacting employee performance. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences , 106 – 115.
Gözükara, İ., & Şimsek, Ö. (2016). Role of Leadership in Employees’ Work Engagement: Organizational Identification and Job Autonomy. International Journal of Business and Management, 11 (1), 72-84.
Mishra, K., Boynton, L., & Aneil, M. (2014). Driving Employee Engagement: The Expanded Role of Internal Communications. International Journal of Business Communication, 51 (2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488414525399
Osborne, S., & Hammoud, M. (2017). Effective Employee Engagement in the Workplace. International Journal of Applied Management and Technology, 16 (1), 50-67. https://doi.org/10.5590/IJAMT.2017.16.1.04
Saul, M., Kim, W., & Kim, T. (2015). Leadership and Employee Engagement: Proposing Research Agendas Through a Review of Literature. Human Resource Development Review, 14 (1), 38 –63.
Sun, L. (2019). Employee Engagement: A Literature Review. International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 9 (1), 63-80. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijhrs.v9i1.14167
