Thinking About Workplace Engagement

Abstract

The Problem. This study investigated the frequency with which employees (N = 272) in a computer sciences company in the United States were the target of supervisor and coworker incivility as well as the link between this incivility and worker engagement. Participants completed a paper-and-pencil survey consisting of the Workplace Engagement Scale (Shuck) and modified versions of the Workplace Incivility Scale (Cortina, Magley, Williams, & Langhout). The Solution.Results indicated that 78% of the participants had experienced supervisor incivility and 81% had experienced coworker incivility during the past year. MANOVA analysis revealed that females had experienced more coworker incivility and males had experienced more supervisor incivility. Hierarchical regression analyses indicated that after controlling for gender and age, both incivility variables were negative predictors of safety and availability engagement. Specifically, coworker incivility more powerfully predicted safety engagement whereas supervisor incivility was more closely linked with availability engagement. Recommendations for HRD research and practice are discussed. The Stakeholders. Stakeholders include workplace supervisors/managers, HRD professionals, HR managers, organizational leaders, and employees.

Workplace Incivility in a Swedish Context

“…The participants consistently rated a lower frequency of experienced workplace incivility on every item of the scale, as compared with the data collected by Reio Jr and Sanders- Reio (2011) in an American sample. Despite the lower ratings, the results show that workplace incivility is prevalent in Sweden, and can be considered a fairly common phenomenon.…”

“…Recent measures in the US have shown reports of 78% experiencing supervisor incivility, and 81% being subjected to coworker incivility over the past year (Reio Jr & Sanders-Reio, 2011). Pearson and Porath (2009) found that 10% had witnessed workplace incivility from coworkers daily.…”

Evaluating the evidence on employee engagement and its potential benefits to NHS staff: a narrative synthesis of the literature

“…Kahn's original research was qualitative and ethnographic and, building on this, four quantitative scales have been developed and used to measure engagement. 4,22,68,70 Thirteen items used this definition of engagement. l Work task or job engagement: including the work of the Utrecht Group, 71 which has focused specifically on the notion of engagement with work tasks.…”

“…Overall, nine validated, quantitative scales used in empirical papers designed to measure engagement levels met the standards of quality and relevance and were included in the extraction process, 4,22,67,68,[70][71][72][73]76,190 along with other perspectives that adopted a more qualitative/ethnographic approach.…”

“…Two cross-sectional self-report studies examined negative aspects of leadership: Reio and Sanders-Reio 68 found a negative link between supervisor incivility and two aspects of engagement, and Sulea et al 271 found that perceptions of abusive supervision and engagement were negatively associated.…”