3. Employees engagement theories
Theories such as Reinforcement theory; B. F. Skinner’s theory of reinforcement indicates the application of reward and punishment (Austin & Taiwoo, 2014). It is the course of action taken to control the consequences of the behaviour. This theory is a combination of rewards/ punishments used to reinforce desired behaviour or extinguish unwanted behavior.
EGR theory; is generally known as the theory of existence, resistance, and growth. It is a study which motivational factors enable to understand the individual human behaviour (Jane, 2012).
Two factor theory: This theory argues two factors which are motivators and hygiene factors influence motivation in the workplace. Motivators are which encourage employees to work hard and hygiene factors are employees unmotivated if they are not present (EPM, 2018).
Vroom’s Expectancy theory; this theory is based on assumptions and has three main elements: expectancy, instrumentality, and valence. A person’s estimate of the probability that job-related effort will result in a given level of performance is expectancy. An individual’s estimate of the probability that a given level of achieved task performance will lead to various work outcomes is instrumentality. Valence is the strength of an employee’s preference for a particular reward. Thus, salary increases, promotion, peer acceptance, recognition by supervisors, or any other reward might have more or less value to individual employees (Fred, 2011).
Figure 3.0: Types of Motivational Programs, Examples, and Linked Theories
(Source: Dongho, 2006)
Moving on to the next factor, loyalty is the characteristic of employees who has faith and devotion towards the organization. Maximum of their time, energy, knowledge, skill and effort is given to the organization to achieve organizational goals (Rishipal, 2013). Whereas trust, is the confidence when the action is consistent with their word. What truly matters is, the organization and its co-workers respects the skills and shows concerns of the employee’s welfare (Robert & Sheryl, 2008).
Human resource system does play a huge part in employee engagement, like staffing, training, and development practices. This will contribute to enhance competitive advantage and potentially maintain the organization and employee fit (Yupono, 2014).
Kahn (1990), explain disengagement as “the withdrawing or defending of oneself physically, cognitively or emotionally during their work role performance.” Outcomes of employee disengagement detail by Zafrul (2017) as; negative job attitude, the absence of teamwork, rigidness to accept feedback, lack of trust, low morale, no learning, the higher rate of turnover, more work place violence and bullying, more health problem, higher conflict, more absenteeism, lower productivity, higher rate if accident and safety problem, more deviant work place behaviour, lateness, loss of cultural values, postponement/ withhold of woks, no innovation and creativity and lack of interpersonal relation
.
According to Forbes (2017), 18 percent are actively disengaged of work. This workforce is normally negative; creates a negative environment, unhappy about their employment and I always vocal about it. They would have a significant influence over others. The organization needs to watch-out for these types of employees as they could toxicity the organization and can rarely be transformed into true “A” players.
Reference
Dongho, K (2006). Employee Motivation: “Just Ask Your
Employees”. Seoul Journal of Business. Vol 12, pp. 20-34.
Available at <http://s-space.snu.ac.kr/bitstream/10371/1819/1/sjbv12n1_019.pdf>[Accessed on 18th November
2018].
Expert Program Management: EPM, (2018). Herzberg’s Motivation Theory –
Two Factor Theory. [Online] Available at <https://expertprogrammanagement.com/2018/04/hertzbergs-two-factor-theory/>. [Accessed on
20th November 2018].
Forbes, 2017. 5 Powerful Steps To Improve Employee Engagement. [Online]
Available at < https://www.forbes.com/sites/brentgleeson/2017/10/15/5-powerful-steps-to-improve-employee-engagement/#2ad493e8341d >. [Accessed on 19th November
2018].
Jane, C (2012). The Development and Use of the Theory of ERG: A
Literature Review. Emerging Leadership Journeys. Vol. 5 (1),
pp. 2- 8 [Online]. Available at <https://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/elj/vol5iss1/ELJ_Vol5No1_Caulton_pp2-8.pdf > .[Accessed 20 November
2018].
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and
disengagement at work. Academy of management journal, 33(4), pp.692-724.
Available at < https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/256287> [Accessed on
14th November 2018].
Robert, W. & Sheryl, R. (2008). Trust in the workplace a monograph.
Rishipal, M. (2013). Global Journal of Management and Business Research
Administration and Management- Performance Management and Employee
Loyalty. Double Blind Peer Reviewed International Research Journal. Vol
13(3), ISSN: 2249-4588. Available at <https://journalofbusiness.org/index.php/GJMBR/article/download/923/834/>[Accessed on 05th November
2018].
Yupono, B. (2014). Leadership Style In Improving Performance Through
Engagement. IOSR Journal of Business and Management (IOSR-JBM). Vol.
16(5, Ver. II), pp. 40-49. Available at <http://iosrjournals.org/iosr-jbm/papers/Vol16-issue5/Version-2/G016524049.pdf>. [Accessed on
18th November 2018].
Zafrul, A. (2017). Employee Disengagement: A Fatal Consequence to
Organization and its Ameliorative Measures. International Review of Management
and Marketing (IRMM). Vol 7(2), pp.49-52. Available at <file:///C:/Users/Taniya%20John/Downloads/3896-11140-1-PB.pdf>. [Accessed on 18th November
2018].
As stated by Macey and Schneider (2008 )Having engaged in employees might be a key to higher advantage. This will be particularly valid in the event that we can indicate how the engagement develop produces impacts at levels of concern to management. Similarly as with every single beneficial thing, the test of building up the conditions for state and social employee engagement will be strange
ReplyDeleteAccording to Gallup, only 33% of employees in the USA were engaged in 2016. Shriar (2017) states “involved in, enthusiastic about and committed to their workplace”. Engaged, motivated employees have higher satisfaction, which leads to enthusiasm in their role and overall company growth in the form of higher retention and lower turnover; higher productivity; increased profitability; less absenteeism, and increased employee loyalty.
DeleteEmployee engagement tend to fulfill the requirements of the company and address according to the values and culture of it and share. Engaged employees pay attention and get more confidence to carried out difference ( Macey, 2006 cited in Kaufman et al., 2007).
ReplyDeleteKey drivers of employee engagement, trust & integrity, Nature of the job, career growth opportunities, Pride about the company, Co-workers / team members, Employee development, Relationship with manager (Siddhanta & Roy, 2010)
DeleteTo add,Kahn (1990: 894) defined employee engagement as ‘the harnessing of organization members’ selves to their work roles; in engagement, people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally during role performances’. There have been dozens of definitions since the explosion of interest in the concept during the 2000s. Harter et al (2002: 269) stated that engagement was ‘the individual’s involvement and satisfaction with as well as enthusiasm for work.
ReplyDelete"Employee Engagement is the devotion, passion of employees and effective leadership skills with support from the top management to the employees. Human resource leaders set the drive and creed of their company and spread that positive morale to the employees in the company" (Sarangi & Nayak, 2016).
DeleteHi Taniya, thought of commenting about the meta-analysis by Harter et al. (2002). This revealed that the employee engagement can drastically influence on customer loyalty and satisfaction levels, and when the employee engagement is weaker business-level outcomes of the organization can have turned out to be significantly declined. Also Riketta (2002) found a direct correlation between attitudinal commitment of the organization on recognizing the individual strength of the employees, can gain significance job performance increase. Most importantly it should be noted that the role of managers on employees’ levels of engagement and the levels of managers' self-efficacy have a correlation on the employee engagement as well, as determined by Luthans et al. (2002). This proves the outcomes of the managers of the organization are important at both individual and organizational level to maintain the employee engagement.
ReplyDeleteHello, According to a new meta-analysis of 1.4 million employees conducted by the Gallup Organization, improving employee engagement is not simply about improving productivity — although organizations with a high level of engagement do report 22% higher productivity.
DeleteYou write a wonderful blog on employee engagement. Bring up Collaboration and Engagement in Your Remote Team through Online employee engagement games to Boost Productivity & stay connected to remote teams.
ReplyDeleteEngaged employees are not simply working for salary and promotions but they also work effectively and efficiently for the growth of the company. Online employee engagement activities have become the most popular topic for leaders and HR professionals, because of the pandemic conditions.
ReplyDeleteNice article! Indoor activities are surrounded by "serious air" because they do not take place on an open roof. If you want to engage your employees, but you are on a budget. Then we are here to help you. Checkout these example of indoor employee engagement games for corporates to engage them.
ReplyDelete