Employee Engagement Is a Source of Strategic Advantage
An engaged employee achieves above average levels of productivity and contributes significantly to team effectiveness; an engaged team is a source of unit or departmental efficiency; but an engaged workforce is a potential source of organisation wide competitiveness and strategic advantage. Engaged employees are enthusiastic about their work, are committed to the organisationâs mission and vision, and willing to go above and beyond their assigned duties to deliver it (IOSH 2015; Ulrich and Ulrich 2011; Kaplan et al. 2017; Lee et al. 2017b; Amah and Sese 2018; Hakanen et al. 2018; Singh et al. 2016, 831; Bakker 2017; Carrillo et al. 2017). Their collective output can have a disproportionate impact on the achievement of objectives, the strategies to do so and effective stewardship and policy in their delivery. The perceived benefits of employee engagement (from the work of inter alia Saks 2006, 2017; Bakker and Schaufeli 2008; Robertson-Smith and Marwick 2009; Albrecht 2010; Bersin 2015; CIPD 2017) explain why it has been such a compelling issue over the past thirty years.
There has been a good deal of practitioner-based fact finding to demonstrate its effectiveness and the resulting outputs have linked employee engagement to better shareholder returns and income; revenue growth and higher profit margins on the one hand; and lower absenteeism and job stress, better health and overall well-being on the other. Meta-analytic studies have shown that organisations with the highest sustainable engagement scores had above average one-year operating margins; and those with highly engaged workforces outperformed their peers significantly in earnings per share or improved performance outcomes in not for profit organisations. Consultancies and research firms argue that employee engagement is closely related to business outcomes because engaged employees âgo the extra mileâ for their colleagues, their organisations and themselves (Schwarz 2012; Gallup 2018b; Willis Towers Watson 2018; Akingbola and van den Berg 2019). A nationwide study in the UK concluded that âit is our firm belief that it can be a triple win: for the individual at work, the enterprise or service, and for the country as a wholeâ (MacLeod and Clarke 2009, 6). From a practitioner perspective there appears to be much to commend a greater understanding of the concept of employee engagement. A plethora of awards from professional organisations such as SHRM and the CIPD are testament to the value and importance attached to it and the diverse nature of the organisations to whom engagement is such a critical subject. (The leading companies of SHRMâs 2018 âWhen Work Works Awardsâ ranged from the Navyâs Credentials Program Office/Naval Education and Training; through to the Autumn Group; from Take Flight Learning to iHire; organisationâs shortlisted for the CIPDâs 2019 Best Employee Experience Initiative ranged from Companies House to Heathrow Airport; from Network Homes; to the Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust; and HR Asiaâs recognition of China Mobile International and Hang Lung Properties Limited, Coach Asia Pacific and Haitong International, again reflect the diversity of interest in engagement.)
Additionally, an upsurge of academic activity has meant that âthe field has come a long way in understanding what engagement is, and what it is not, and identifying its drivers and consequencesâ (Shantz 2017, 65). Building on ground-breaking work by Kahn (1990), insightful research by inter alia Harter et al. (2002), Schaufeli and Bakker (2004), Saks (2006), Macey and Schneider (2008), Bakker and Leiter (2010), Truss et al. (2013) and Albrecht et al. (2018) has contributed to a greater theoretical understanding of the subject. Throughout the research, employee engagement is consistently portrayed as something given by the employee which can benefit both the individual and the organisation through commitment, dedication and discretionary effort; as well as utilising talent to its fullest extent. It is argued that engagement occurs when people bring in or leave out their personal selves during their work and is characterised by physical, cognitive and emotional factors enabling engaged employees to contribute in a way that is psychologically beneficial leading to appreciation, affirmation, respect and greater meaningfulness in work (Truss et al. 2013; Geue 2018). When a member of the workforce is clear about what is expected of them, is confident in having the knowledge and skills for the chosen role and has a positive attitude and behaviour; when they work in an organisation where leaders communicate clearly a vision for the future and who recognise individual contribution towards it; when values are lived, creating a sense of trust and integrity; and where there is a channel for the workforce to voice their views and concerns, then the possibilities of engagement are high (Brown et al. 2015; ACAS 2018).
The passion surrounding the subject means that, for some, the study of employee engagement has become a âmovement;â or an âimperativeâ because contemporarily the talent and commitment of employees is a primary source of competitiveness, framed in the link between people and performance at multiple organisational levels. As a result, some 85% of executives have identified engagement as a priority for their organisations (Samara 2016). It is important in both conceptualising and measuring âthe impact of human capital in organisations and in the integration of many different aspects of HR â employee satisfaction, commitment, motivation, involvement and the psychological contract, as well as features such as job design and total rewardsâ (McBain 2007, 16). The context within which organisations operate and the possible impact on the workforce is an important starting point for both its antecedents and outcomes.
Employee Engagement at a Time of Disruptive Innovation and Continuous Change
Employee engagement takes place in a contemporary environment that is being transformed at an exponential rate. In addition to intense competition, organisations are increasingly faced with disruptive innovation and continuous change in the social and economic context within which they operate or compete. As such, organisations seek new strategies âto make their service delivery more sustainable at the economic, environmental and psychological levelsâ and the concept of engagement of is seen as both compelling and necessary in this quest (Graffigna 2017). For some, a convergence of forces, especially those embodied in the concept of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, has created boundless opportunity to engage in both traditional and innovative ways. For others, where twenty-first century reality butts up against twentieth century organisation; and where employment is an increasingly personalised affair, transformation and change are challenging and traumatic processes. But for all, best practice, best fit or best principles in how to structure the organisation, how to shape work- flow and patterns, how to lead and manage and how to engage the workforce in the face of the ultra-dynamic context have rarely been more important. In such an environment, the concept of âVUCAâ meaning volatility, unpredictability, complexity and ambiguityâinfluential in management thinking since being introduced from the annals of US military plannersâexplains part of the challenge. But additional powerful, disruptive, technological, social and economic forces and polarised political viewpoints have coalesced to shape a new direction for society and ...