The Meaning, Antecedents and Outcomes of Employee Engagement: A Narrative Synthesis

Abstract

The claim that high levels of engagement can enhance organizational performance and individual well-being has not previously been tested through a systematic review of the evidence. To bring coherence to the diffuse body of literature on engagement, the authors conducted a systematic synthesis of narrative evidence involving 214 studies focused on the meaning, antecedents and outcomes of engagement. The authors identified six distinct conceptualizations of engagement, with the field dominated by the Utrecht Group's 'work engagement' construct and measure, and by the theorization of engagement within the 'job demands-resources' framework. Five groups of factors served as antecedents to engagement: psychological states; job design; leadership; organizational and team factors; and organizational interventions. Engagement was found to be positively associated with individual morale, task performance, extra-role performance and organizational performance, and the evidence was most robust in relation to task performance. However, there was an over-reliance on quantitative, cross-sectional and self-report studies within the field, which limited claims of causality. To address controversies over the commonly used measures and concepts in the field and gaps in the evidence-base, the authors set out an agenda for future research that integrates emerging critical sociological perspectives on engagement with the psychological perspectives that currently dominate the field.

Building and sustaining work engagement – a participatory action intervention to increase work engagement in nursing staff

“…A very recent systematic review (Keyko, Cummings, Yonge, & Wong, 2016) extensively explored the relationships between antecedents of work engagement and outcomes within the context of professional nursing practice and highlighted the importance of work engagement for quality of care, voice behaviour, patient satisfaction, work effectiveness, and productivity. Other reviews support these findings (e.g., Bailey, Madden, Alfes, & Fletcher, 2015;Bargagliotti, 2012), and a number of empirical studies in healthcare settings have also noted the importance of participation in decision-making, training, trust in a manager, and authentic leadership for work engagement, quality of care, and safety outcomes (Laschinger & Leiter, 2006;Saka, A. M. 2006;Shantz, Alfes, & Arevshatian, 2016;Wong, Lashinger, & Cummings, 2010). Taken together, these findings suggest that an intervention designed to increase the work engagement of healthcare workers will be particularly successful and appropriate on hospital wards where older people are cared for.…”

“…Other definitions exist (e.g., Kahn, 1990;Maslach & Leiter, 1997;May, Gilson, & Harter, 2004;Saks, 2006), and debate persists over the meaning and distinctiveness of the concept (for a review, see Macey & Schneider, 2008); however, Schaufeli and colleagues' conceptualization is currently the most dominant and researched in the literature (Bailey et al, 2015). Indeed, a vast literature on work engagement has amassed over the previous two decades, led by both academics and practitioners (e.g., Bailey et al, 2015;MacLeod & Clarke, 2009).…”

How can personal development lead to increased engagement? The roles of meaningfulness and perceived line manager relations

“…Indeed there is some evidence to show that perceptions regarding opportunities for development are positively associated with engagement. Bailey et al (2015) systematically reviewed the engagement literature to find that 26 empirical studies out of 172 that met the quality criteria for inclusion (from 5771 items) examined the association between a range of job resources and engagement, yet only one examined the specific relationship between opportunities for development and engagement, with this finding a positive association. Additionally, found, within a sample of 207 employees in the health care industry, that perceived support for participation in human resource development practices was positively and similarly related to each dimension of engagement (i.e., emotional, cognitive, behavioural).…”

“…Over recent years initiatives to improve employee engagement have become widespread because of their potential to leverage organizational success through harnessing the motivation and spirit of its employees (Saks & Gruman, 2014). As HRM practitioners are often responsible for leading organizational change initiatives that seek to improve employee engagement through human resource (HR) practices (Arrowsmith & Parker, 2013;Reissner & Pagan, 2013), and given that a recent evidence synthesis shows that employee perceptions of development are associated with engagement (Bailey, Madden, Alfes, & Fletcher, 2015), it may be particularly useful for HRM researchers to examine the psychological processes that underpin the relationship between personal development and engagement in more depth. Currently, there is a lack of understanding of how personal development leads to engagement, and in what circumstances this process occurs.…”

“…Although there is growing evidence to show that job resources, as a collection of physical, social and organizational aspects of a job, promotes high levels of engagement (Bailey et al, 2015), there are a lack of studies that specifically examine the effects of development practices and engagement . Therefore, there is a need to strengthen this particular body of evidence as the effects of personal development on engagement has, to date, been subject to only a handful of studies.…”