|
Employee engagement is a property of the relationship between an organization and its employees. An "engaged employee" is one who is fully absorbed by and enthusiastic about their work and so takes positive action to further the organization's reputation and interests. An organization with 'high' employee engagement might therefore be expected to outperform those with 'low' employee engagement, all else being equal. There are, however, a range of definitions that have emerged around concepts relating to employee engagement. Research has looked at the involvement, commitment and productivity of employees. Organizations have often had a focus on how to generate engagement, rather than seeking objective ways to measure it. Care must therefore be taken when looking at some of the statistics presented around engagement. ==Definitions== William Kahn provided the first formal definition of personal engagement as "the harnessing of organisation members' selves to their work roles; in engagement, people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally during role performances.〔Kahn, William A. "Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagement and Disengagement at Work." ''Academy of Management Journal.'' Dec 1990; 33, 4; ProQuest pg. 692〕" In 1993, Schmidt et al. proposed a bridge between the pre-existing concept of 'job satisfaction' and employee engagement with the definition: "an employee's involvement with, commitment to, and satisfaction with work. Employee engagement is a part of employee retention." This definition integrates the classic constructs of job satisfaction (Smith et al., 1969), and organizational commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991). Defining employee engagement remains problematic. In their review of the literature in 2011, Shuck and Wollard identify four main sub-concepts within the term: # "Needs satisfying" approach, in which engagement is the expression of one's preferred self in task behaviours. # "Burnout antithesis" approach, in which energy, involvement, efficacy are presented as the opposites of established "burnout" constructs: exhaustion, cynicism and lack of accomplishment. # Satisfaction-engagement approach, in which engagement is a more technical version of job satisfaction, evidenced by Gallup's own Q12 engagement survey which gives an r=.91 correlation with one (job satisfaction) measure.〔 〕 # The multidimensional approach, in which a clear distinction is maintained between job and organisational engagement, usually with the primary focus on antecedents and consequents to role performance rather than organisational identification. Definitions of engagement vary in the weight they give to the individual vs the organisation in creating engagement. Recent practice has situated the drivers of engagement across this spectrum, from within the psyche of the individual employee (for example, promising recruitment services that will filter out 'disengaged' job applicants 〔http://www.recruiter.co.uk/archive/part-17/FindingPotential-aims-to-help-employers-recruit-engaged-employees/〕) to focusing mainly on the actions and investments the organisation makes to support engagement. These definitional issues are potentially severe for practitioners. With different (and often proprietary) definitions of the object being measured, statistics from different sources are not readily comparable. Engagement work remains open to the challenge that its basic assumptions are, as Tom Keenoy describes them, 'normative' and 'aspirational', rather than analytic or operational - and so risk being seen by other organizational participants as "motherhood and apple pie" rhetoric. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「employee engagement」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|