Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
&
Development,
Discretionary
Effort,
I INTRODUCTION
Engagement is a key buzzword in 21st century management. Strategic human resource
management rests on the belief that people are the key to achieving competitive advantage.
Employees need to be seen as assets to be developed, not costs to be controlled. This free
course explores three key themes: employee engagement, employee involvement and collective
aspects of employee relations. Engagement is a key buzzword in 21st century management.
Strategic human resource management rests on the belief that people are the key to achieving
competitive advantage. Employees need to be seen as assets to be developed, not costs to be
controlled. This free course explores three key themes: employee engagement, employee
involvement and collective aspects of employee relations. Employee engagement appears to
have a relatively Robust research community contributing to contemporary theorizing. It is
based largely in the psychological sciences and particularly organization and industrial
psychology. There is also a significant body of research that investigates employee engagement
in schools and school systems, with an obvious sampling bias toward teacher groups. The
impetus for this attention to engagement is the emerging empirical evidence that engagement
has significant benefits for organizations of all kinds. A number of studies have challenged the
extent to which suitable work experience placements have been available to young people
seeking specific occupational interests. Hodgkinson and Hammill (2010) have argued that the
utopian ideal of all civil engineering undergraduates having a relevant (work experience)
placement is unobtainable.
II STUDY VARIABLES
1. DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLE
Age
Gender
Income
Years of experience
Position
Area
Qualification
2. INDEPENDENT VARIABLE
Job
Co-Workers
Superior
Department
Organization
Rewards and Recognition
Opportunities
Team work
Immediate supervisor
Output 1
Output 2
3. EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT (Gallup 12 Q)
Expectations
Materials and equipment
Opportunity to do what I do best
Recognition for good work
Someone at work cares about me
Encourages my development
Opinions count
Mission/Purpose
Associates committed to quality
Best friend
Progress
Learn & grow
.4. OUTCOME
High performance
Employee stay
III CONCEPTUAL FRAME WORK
Independent
Variables
Job
Co-Workers
Communication
Superior
Department
Organization
Rewards and
recognition
Opportunities
Team work
Immediate
Demograph
ic factors
Vares
High
Performance
Employee
Engagement
Employee
Stay
Communication
The recent Review of Teacher Education in New South Wales, Australia, highlighted the
alarming upward trend in early career teacher resignation rates in NSW over the past
four years.
Bakker, Arnold B.; Hakanen, Jari J.; Demerouti, Evangelia; Xanthopoulou, Despoina
(2007) In this articles the author stated On the basis of the job demands-resources
model, the authors predicted that job resources act as buffers and diminish the negative
relationship between pupil misbehavior and work engagement.
Mark L. Savickas, Nadya.A. Fouad (2007) This author examined that the Job control
and organization-based self-esteem proved to be the best lagged predictors of the three
dimensions of work engagement.
A familiar starting point in literature considering the impact of employer engagement in
education is the initial lament over the lack of robust data on the impact of activities
(AIR UK, 2008; Bartlett, 2009; Gillie, 2012).
Johnsrud and Rosser (1999) also suggest that the smaller the institution, the more
positive administrative workers moral and consequentially the higher chances for their
engagement.
Green & Rogers, (1997) - This study captured the views of teaching staff who argued
that pupil participants increased in confidence, maturity and in their social skills. They
found, moreover, evidence of attitudinal change in terms of improved motivation in
class, increased completion of homework assignments and higher levels of attendance
Ofsteds ( 2007) The author review of the Young Apprenticeship programme
through which schools offered a more varied curriculum at Key Stage 4, rich in
employer engagement (including 50+ days of work experience) and aimed at pupils of
average and above average ability suggested high levels of relevance in preparing
young people for the world of work.
Balarin et al., (2008) - The author viewed study involvement of businesses and their
employees in school governing is greatly appreciated by schools, employee volunteers
themselves and the businesses that are most proactive in supporting their employees
volunteering activities.
Dollard and Bakker (2010), in their study of teachers and administrators in Australia,
argued that psychosocial safety climate (PSC) precedes both job demands and job
resources.
1.
Age (Yrs)
%
2.
3.
5.
20-25
26-30
31-35
36-40
41 & above
17
40
47
24
11
12%
29%
34%
17%
8%
Male
Female
57
82
41%
59%
Monthly
Income (Rs.)
15,000-20,000
20,001
25,000
25,001
30,000
29
52
48
10
21%
37%
35%
7%
Experience
0-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
20&above
52
45
32
06
04
Gender
30001&above
%
Position
6.
%
Area
7.
37%
32%
High
Middle
23%
4%
Low
36
78
25
26%
56%
18%
Urban
Rural
59
80
42%
58%
4%
Factors
2 Value
Sig.
Decision
1.
Age
1.984
0.00
Reject
2.
Gender
75.25
0.02
Reject
3.
Monthly income
1.935
0.00
Reject
4.
Years of experience
1.870
0.00
Reject
5.
Position
1.072
0.00
Reject
6.
Area
53.686
0.32
Accept
7.
Qualification
2.834
0.09
Accept
S.No.
Demographic Factors
Sig.
Decision
1.
Gender
1.958
0.012
Reject
2.
Age
3.749
0.000
Reject
3.
Income
3.056
0.019
Reject
4.
Year of experience
2.251
0.034
Reject
5.
Position
2.653
0.136*
Accept
6.
Area
3.318
0.069*
Accept
7.
Qualification
6.110
0.173*
Accept
Hypothesis (H0): Employee Engagementdo not vary with the demographic characteristics of
the respondents.
From the table, the results reveal that the employee engagement do vary with the
demographic factors such as gender, age, income and experience of the respondents. (p<0.05)
The results also revealed that the employee engagement do not vary with the demographic
factors viz., position, area and qualification of the respondents (p>0.05).
Table No: 3.1
Unstandardized Coefficients of Regression Model Independent factors - I
And Employee engagement
Predictors
S.No
Unstandardized Coefficients
Sig.
Std. Error
(Constant)
0.011
0.447
0.043
1.
Job
0.455
0.129
0.001*
2.
Co-Workers
0.304
0.136
0.027*
3.
Superior
0.110
0.128
0.394
4.
Department
0.127
0.135
0.047*
5.
Organization
0.151
0.100
0.033*
R = 0.757
R2 = 0.573
employee engagement.
The significant individual factors with predictors values towards employee engagement are
shown in the figure: 1
Job
0.455
Co-workers
Employe
e
Engagem
ent
0.304
Department
0.127
0.151
Organization
Figure: 1
Regression Model - Individual Factor - Iand Employee Engagement
Table No: 3.2
Unstandardized Coefficients of Regression Model Independent factors II
and Employee engagement
Predictors
S.No
Unstandardized Coefficients
Sig.
Std. Error
(Constant)
1.056
0.389
0.008
1.
0.109
0.109
0.027*
2.
Opportunities
0.489
0.106
0.000*
3.
Team work
0.333
0.099
0.001*
4.
Immediate supervisor
0.059
0.115
0.610
5.
Communication
0.175
0.093
0.048*
R = 0.794
R2 = 0.630
* = significance at 5%level
* (If the sig. of p is less than 0.05, and it indicates that the concerned factor is significant in the
model)
Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant effect of Independent factors II on employee
engagement
The above shows that the predictor variables such as rewards & recognition,
opportunities, team work and communication (p<0.05) are statistically significant towards
employee engagement. The table also shows that the variable, i.e., immediate supervisoris not
significant (p>0.05).The table also depicted the R and R2 values of the model. The R value
represents the simple correlation and is 0.794, which indicated a high degree of correlation
between the individual factors and employee engagement.The R2 value indicated that 63 %
(0.630) of variance in dependent variable employee engagement is explained by the
independent variables.
From the above table, it can be inferred that there are significant effects of independent factors
viz., rewards & recognition, opportunities, team work and communicationon employee
engagement. The researcher also inferred that there is no significant effect of factor viz.,
immediate supervisor on employee engagement.
The significant individual factors with predictors values towards employee engagement
are shown in the figure: 2
Rewards &
Recognition
0.109
Opportunities
Employee
Engagement
0.489
0.333
Team Work
0.175
Communication
Figure: 2
Regression Model - Individual Factor IIand Employee Engagement
Table No: 4
Chi-Square Test between Employee Engagement and Outcome factors
S.No
1.
Factors
High performance
2.
Employee stay
(* = Ho accepted at 5% significance level)
2 Value
Sig.
Decision
5.198
0.00
Reject
7.788
0.00
Reject
Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between the employee engagement and
Outcome factors
From the table, it is found that there is a significant relationship between employee
engagement and outcome factors viz., high performance & employee retention, since p value is
less than 0.05. Hence null hypothesis is rejected and alternate hypothesis is accepted.
Table No: 5
Unstandardized Coefficients of Regression Model Employee engagement
And High performance
Predictors
S.No
1.
Unstandardized Coefficients
Sig.
Std. Error
(Constant)
2.655
0.376
0.000
High performance
0.218
0.102
0.033*
R = 0.812
R2 = 0.659
S.No
1.
Unstandardized Coefficients
Sig.
Std. Error
(Constant)
2.680
0.296
0.000
Employee stay
0.236
0.088
0.009*
R = 0.761
R2 = 0.579
XI RECOMMENDATIONS
According to study results, there is positive relationship between the factors viz.,
organizational and group factors with employee engagement. The predictor variables such as
job, co-workers, superior, Department, Organization are statistically significant towards
employee engagement. The variable, i.e., superior is not significant. The predictor variables
such as rewards & recognition, opportunities, team work and communication are statistically
significant towards employee engagement. The independent variable, i.e., immediate
supervisors is not significant. These factors are equally gets more importance and gives better
performance. As per this study, more involvements have to be needed to the employees which
will give more impact in the organization. In the current competitive scenario, organization has
to do something different, otherwise they cannot beat the completion and sustain with their
competitors. So, the organization should give more importance to all the study factors very
carefully for the effective employee engagement. The organization also facilitates the good
work environment to employees to exhibit their talents with fullest efforts.
XII CONCLUSION
Understanding teacher engagement is critical to understanding the psychological
processes underlying effective teaching. Our aim was to create a measure of teacher
engagement that reflects the particular features of working in classrooms and in schools, and
especially the social interactions shared by teachers and students. This paper brief about
available school division documents points to a number of positive and consistent policies and
practices to promote employee engagement. However, a few gaps that occur in most contexts
and some variability among the divisions studied. The reader is cautioned about the limitations
of the documentary sources accessed, but very least, the review should serve to highlight the
kinds of explicit messaging that are present with respect to the phenomenon of employee
engagement. If we assume that the choices made about the kinds of messages to highlight
reflect the priorities and values in school divisions, perhaps reflection on what is presented in
these paper provide some insight into the practices employed in rural school divisions in the
province.
REFERENCES
[1] Kahn, W. A. (1990) Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at
work, The Journal of Positive Psychology. 5(1). pp. 83-96.
[2] Bhatla, N. (2011) The role of conscientiousness. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 80. pp.
555-564.
[3] Bormann, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997 International Journal of Scientific &
Engineering Research. 2(8). pp. 1-7.
[4] Avery, G., & Cameron, F. (1998), Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume IX Number 1 83
[5] Sarangi, S., & Srivastava, R. K. (2012), Impact of organizational culture and
communication on employee engagement.
[6] Matamala, A. C., Pace, V. L., & Thometz, H. (2010), Work engagement as a mediator
between personality and citizenship behaviour, Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume IX
Number 1 88
[7] Babcock-Roberson, M. E., & Strickland, O. J. (2010), The Enlargement of the European
Union (Vol. 1). Burns & Oates
[8] LePine, J. A., Colquitt, J. A., & Erez, A. (2000), Human Relations, Psychological
presence at work. Human Relations. 45(4). pp. 321-349.
[9] Ewing and Smith, (2003), The beliefs that teachers work engagement is a factor of
students achievement, Journal in schools of Nigeria volume X Number 1 83
[10] A. Bakker & W. Schaufeli. Positive Organizational Behavior: Engaged Employee in
Flourishing Organization, Journal of Organization Behavior, (29) Pp. 60-64, 2008
[11] Brookhart, S.M. and D.J. Freeman, (1992). Characteristics of entering teacher candidates.
Rev. Educational Res., 62: 37-60
[12] Ewing, R.A. and D.L. Smith, (2003) Retaining quality beginning teachers in the
profession Journal in English Teaching: Practice Critique, 2: 15-32.
[13] Bakker, Arnold B.; Hakanen, Jari J.; Demerouti, Evangelia; Xanthopoulou, (May 2007),
Despoina Journal of Educational Psychology, v99 n2 p274-284
[14] (Green & Rogers, 1997), the impact of business mentoring suggesting a positive link
with attainment at 16 25, 34-36
[15] February 2007, Job demands and resources as antecedents of work engagement Journal of
Vocational Behaviour - A longitudinal study Volume 70, Issue 1, Pages 149171.
[16] AIR UK, 2008; Bartlett, 2009; Gillie, 2012, The drivers of employee engagement. ReportInstitute for Employment Studies.
[17] Johnsrud and Rosser (1999) Employee engagement in business environment- journal of