WORK ENGAGEMENT INTRODUCTION

DEFINITION In business Development dimensions International Work engagement increases profits Increasing work engagement pays off Development dimensions International Work engagement has three dimensions Cognitive- belief in and support for the goals and values of the organization Affective- sense of belonging and sense of pride and attachment to the organization Behavioural- willingness to go the extra mile, intention to stay with the organization

DEFINITION Hewitt Engaged employees demonstrate three general behaviours Say- consistently speak positive about the organization Stay- have an intense desire to be a member of an organization despite opportunities to work elsewhere Strive- exert extra time, effort and initiative to contribute to business success

DEFINITION Towers Perrin Employee engagement is an affective state that reflects employees’ personal satisfaction and a sense of of inspiration and satisfaction they get from work and part of the organization

DEFINITION Engagement in academia Kahn ( 1990) Maslach (2001) Harnessing of organization members’ selves to their work roles: in engagement people employ, express themselves physically, cognitively, emotionally and mentally during role performances Maslach (2001) Energy, involvement and efficacy – the direct opposites of the burn out dimensions A positive fulfilling work related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication and absorption ( Schaufeli et al., 2002). It is an affective- cognitive state.

DEFINITION Positive, fulfilling, affective-motivational state of work-related well-being that can be seen as the opposite of job burn out. High levels of energy Enthusiastic involvement to one’s work High levels of vigor and strong identification with one’s work (Bakker, Schaufeli, Leiter, & Tarris, 2008).

DEFINITION Motivational concept Engaged workers feel obligated to strive towards challenging goals They have personal energy they bring to work They do not keep their energy in reserve for something important, they accept that today’s work reflects intense involvement They pay attention – they consider important details while getting the essence of challenging problems

DEFINITION & MEASUREMENT Three dimensions: Absorption: Seeing job as engrossing and something on which they are fully concentrated Vigor: Viewing job as stimulating and energetic and something to which they really want to devote time and effort Dedication: Evaluating job as a significant and meaningful pursuit

DEFINITION & MEASUREMENT Utrecht Work Engagement Scale At work I feel that I am bursting with energy V I find the work that I do full of meaning and purpose D Time flies when I am working A

Related Concepts Extra-role behaviour Personal initiative Job involvement Organizational commitment Job satsifaction Positive affectivity Flow Workaholism

Not all days are created equal: The concept of state work engagement State level of work engagement How do you do at work? Why one person feels more engaged at work on specific days and on other days not. Experiences that fluctuate over time Trait level of work engagement Why one person feels engaged at work while other persons not

Not all days are created equal: The concept of state work engagement Within person perspective Allows for a closer look at temporal patterns of work-related experiences and behaviours. Asking individuals retrospective reports over the previous months or even the year and providing summary accounts of their psychological states ignores the dynamic part of the work engagement. Enables us to examine proximal predictors of work engagement in addition to general predictors

Not all days are created equal: The concept of state work engagement Within person perspective Enables us to examine proximal predictors of work engagement in addition to general predictors When do people feel work engagement Are there specific situational features that have to be present during a specific day in order to feel engaged? Are there person-specific states that foster work engagement during a specific day or week? Not only high levels of self-efficacy are important but a person has to be self efficacious about his/her task on a specific day

Not all days are created equal: The concept of state work engagement Within person perspective Enables us to examine proximal predictors of work engagement in addition to general predictors When do people feel work engagement Are there specific situational features that have to be present during a specific day in order to feel engaged? Are there person-specific states that foster work engagement during a specific day or week? Not only high levels of self-efficacy are important but a person has to be self efficacious about his/her task on a specific day Trait work engagement reflects more of an attitude whereas SWE reflects a vivid experience

Empirical Evidence Studies show that work engagement fluctuates within individuals. Sonnentag (2003) examined work engagement in 147 public service employees over 5 working days 42% variance was at the day level and 58% variance was at the between individual level. Xanthopoulou et al. (2008) studied 44 flight attendants 41% of overall variance was explained by within-person variation. Bakker and Bal (in press) examined 54 teachers over five working days 35% variance was attributable to within person variation

Empirical Evidence Studies show that individuals differ in their overall level of work engagement – 58 to 69% of total variance but day level and week level studies show that they do not engage in work engagement to the same degree.

Empirical Evidence Studies show that individuals differ in their overall level of work engagement – 58 to 69% of total variance but day level and week level studies show that they do not engage in work engagement to the same degree.

Predictors of state engagement Studies examined day level predictors of work engagement concentrated on day-specific states of the person – day level recovery and day-level self efficacy. Job situation variables were also considered

Predictors of state engagement Sonnentag (2003) Day level recovery as a potential predictor of day level SWE. Day level recovery: A person’s experience that he or she has relaxed from yesterday’s job stress and now feels refreshed. Day level recovery – in the morning before the start of the working day SWE- in the afternoon at the end of the working day. SWE was higher on days when employees felt recovered in the morning.

Predictors of state engagement Bakker, van Emmerik, Geurts, & Demetrouti (2008) Assembly line workers Day level recovery and day level work engagement Day level recovery in the morning predicted Day level recovery: A person’s experience that he or she has relaxed from yesterday’s job stress and now feels refreshed. Day level recovery – in the morning before the start of the working day SWE- in the afternoon at the end of the working day. Day level recovery in the morning predicted SWE during the day Interaction effect with job demands Employees who faced high job demands and who were at the same highly recovered in the morning experienced the highest level of SWE during the day.

Predictors of state engagement Conservation of resources framework ( Hobfoll, 1998) People have an innate as well as a learned drive to create, foster, conserve, and protect the quality and quantity of their resources. Many things could be conceived as resources, but COR theory relates to those resources that are key to survival and well-being (e.g., shelter, attachment to significant others, self-esteem), or that are linked to the process of creating and maintaining key resources (e.g., money, credit).

Predictors of state engagement According to COR theory, stress occurs under three conditions: (1) when individuals’ key resources are threatened with loss, (2) when resources are lost, or (3) when individuals fail to gain resources following significant resource Stressful or traumatic events consume these resources, thereby augmenting their sensitivity to subsequent stressors. Recovery during leisure time builds up resources that in turn facilitate SWE

Predictors of state engagement Personal resources foster day level SWE. Day level resources such as day level recovery increases day level self-efficacy. Day-level self efficacy and related resources in turn may help one to fully concentrate on one’s work Day level personal resources ( day level self efficacy, day-level organization based self esteem) predicted SWE ( Xanthopoulou, 2008). I

Predictors of state engagement Personal resources predicted SWE Stamina Ability to concentrate Emotional energy

Predictors of state engagement Xanthoupoulou (2009) looked into job resources too Day specific coaching Day specific autonomy Team climate All these job resources predicted day level SWE.

Predictors of state engagement Job stressors – job demands Day level job demands were positively related to day level SWE If employees have recovered from previous effort and strain If they have high energy reserves and are recovered from previous day’s fatigue

Predictors of state engagement Bakker and Bal ( in press) Week level autonomy, week level exchange with the supervisor and week level opportunities for development predicted SWE.

Predictors of state engagement Bakker and Bal ( in press) Week level autonomy, week level exchange with the supervisor and week level opportunities for development predicted SWE.

Outcomes of state work engagement Sonnentag (2003) examined whether day level SWE was related to day level proactive behaviour During days employees experienced high level of SWE they also reported high levels of personal initiative and learning behaviour. Bakker and Bal (in press) Week level SWE predicted week-level job performance Xanthoupoulou (2009) Fast food company workers Day level job resources had an effect on SWE via day level personal resources Day level SWE predicted day level financial returns.

Outcomes of state work engagement Is day level SWE is related to day level non-work state engagement? Rothbard (2001) examined engagement in the work and family domain with a between person approach. Absorption at work was positively correlated to absorption in the family. Individuals who are engaged at work are also engaged in their private life ( Schaufeli, Trais, LeBlanc, Peeters, Bakker, & De Jonge, 2001).

Developing a comprehensive model of state work engagement Proximal day level personal resources play a role in SWE State self efficacy Self esteem Optimism Positive affect energy They increase employees' belief about being able to address his or her tasks and to achieve the desired outcomes.

Developing a comprehensive model of state work engagement Proximal day level personal resources paly a core role in SWE Positive affect as a proximal day level personal resource foster excitement and interest than in turn will increase feelings of vigour. Therefore resources and experiences that foster positive energy are necessary but not sufficient prerequisites for SWE. States activating positive aspects of the self ( Self efficacy, state self esteem) are of particular importance for the experience of SWE.

Developing a comprehensive model of state work engagement Day level demands will also increase day level work engagement High demands present on the day make it necessary to focus one’s attention on the task at hand and mobilize a high level of energy. High demands reduce the likelihood of getting distracted by irrelevant cues and foster absorption at work.

Developing a comprehensive model of state work engagement Day level demands will interact with personal resources in predicting SWE SWE will be at a high level when day level demands meet a high level of personal resources available at the specific moment. Proximal day level personal resources will benefit from more distal day level processes and from day day level job resorurces. Rceovery restores personal resources that have been threatened by previous job demands.

Practical Implications State work engagement Inform individuals and organizations about how to foster work engagement in specific situations or during specific times Proximal predictors of state work engagement should be paid attention State self efficacy Distal predictors of state work engagement Recovery When high work engagement is needed on a specific day it is crucial for that individuals refill their “resource reservoir” beforehand Autonomy Team climate Supervisor behavior