Developing an employee engagement strategy for Sparta Foods (Pty) Ltd Christine Botes 2015149491 Field study submitted to the UFS Business School in the Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Master’s in Business Administration at the University of the Free State Supervisor: Dr L. Massyn November 2018 i DECLARATION I declare that the field study hereby submitted for the qualification Master’s in Business Administration at the UFS Business School at the University of the Free State is my own independent work and that I have not previously submitted the same work, either as a whole or in part, for a qualification at/in another university/faculty. ii ABSTRACT The main objective of this study was to develop an employee engagement strategy for Sparta Foods (Pty) Ltd. To achieve this objective, the researcher firstly conceptualised the construct of employee engagement to gain a better understanding of the different approaches and definitions relating to this concept. The dimensions of engagement were researched and the different models of engagement studied. It was established that four levels of engagement can be distinguished. In order to determine the current levels of engagement within the organisation, the researcher studied the models of measurement of engagement. Employee engagement is closely linked to organisational performance outcomes. If an organisation can improve its levels of engagement, it can lead to higher productivity, profitability, and employee retention. If employees are not engaged, and the organisation does not address this, it could not only cost the organisation in monetary value, but also contribute to lost managerial hours spent on improving the levels of employee performance. Low levels of employee engagement could have a significant impact on the employee turnover of an organisation, morale in the office, quality of products, and word-of-of-mouth promotion. For this quantitative research study, a positivist epistemological approach was followed. Stratified random sampling was used to sample the total population, which consisted of 792 employees. A random sample size of 400 was selected. The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) questionnaire was used for the collection of the primary data. Some of the questionnaires were web-based and the remainder of the questionnaires were hard copies that were distributed by each head of department (HOD) in the organisation. The overall results of the study indicated that the majority of the respondents were engaged. This means that the majority of the workforce has a positive attitude, but they are not entirely action orientated. The dimensions that scored high negative scores were vigour and absorption. The high negative scores for vigour indicated that some of the employees did not have a positive feeling of physical strength, emotional energy, and cognitive liveliness that arise in response to their evaluation of the work they do. They also do not feel personally fulfilled by the work that they do and it does iii not excite or invigorate them. Employees are thus unwilling to go the extra mile for the organisation and get tired easily when doing their jobs. The respondents did not feel like going to work in the morning and did not have high levels of energy and mental resilience. The high negative scores for absorption, on the other hand, indicate non- commitment and a lack of involvement by employees in their jobs. The employees are not immersed in their jobs and for a large percentage, their job is only a means to an end. These employees are not committed, are not inclined to put much effort into their work, and have no interest in the organisation or a desire to stay there. To increase the level of engagement to actively engaged, the researcher proposed an input strategy of performance appraisals, training, and communication, which would deliver an output of job satisfaction, career progression, and innovation for employees, and employee retention, customer satisfaction, and growth and profitability for the organisation. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION ..................................................................................................................... i ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................... ii LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................. viii LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................. ix LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................... x CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH PROBLEM 1.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1 1.2 BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................... 1 1.2.1 Employee engagement .................................................................................. 1 1.2.2 Background to Sparta Foods .......................................................................... 2 1.3 PROBLEM STATEMENT ...................................................................................... 4 1.3.1 Research questions ........................................................................................ 4 1.4 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY ............................................................................. 4 1.4.1 Primary objective ............................................................................................ 4 1.4.2 Secondary objectives ..................................................................................... 5 1.5 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .............................................................................. 5 1.5.1 Research design ............................................................................................ 5 1.5.2 Sampling strategy .......................................................................................... 5 1.5.3 Data-collection methods ................................................................................. 6 1.5.4 Ethical considerations .................................................................................... 7 1.5.4.1 Permission ................................................................................................. 7 1.5.4.2 Informed consent ....................................................................................... 7 1.5.4.3 Respect for anonymity and confidentiality .................................................. 7 1.5.4.4 Incorrect reporting ...................................................................................... 8 1.5.4.5 Harm to participants ................................................................................... 8 1.5.4.6 Invasion of privacy ..................................................................................... 8 1.5.4.7 Integrity and deception ............................................................................... 8 1.6 DEMARCATION OF THE FIELD STUDY .............................................................. 9 1.7 THESIS LAYOUT .................................................................................................. 9 1.8 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................... 9 v CHAPTER 2: EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT 2.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 10 2.2 CONCEPTUALISATION, MEANING, AND DEFINITION OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT ................................................................................................... 10 2.3 LEVELS OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT .......................................................... 12 2.4 DIMENSIONS OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT ................................................. 15 2.5 MODELS OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT ......................................................... 16 2.5.1 Kahn’s model of engagement ....................................................................... 16 2.5.2 A theoretical model of the antecedents and outcomes of employee engagement ................................................................................................. 17 2.5.3 The job demands-resources (JD-R) model ................................................... 20 2.5.4 Fleck and Inceoglu’s model of engagement ................................................. 22 2.5.5 Macey and Schneider’s tri-dimensional model of engagement ..................... 23 2.5.6 A South African model of engagement ......................................................... 25 2.6 MEASURING EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT ........................................................ 27 2.6.1 The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) ............................................ 28 2.6.2 The Employee Engagement Instrument (EEI) .............................................. 28 2.6.3 Imandin’s theoretical model to measure employee engagement .................. 28 2.6.4 The Benchmark of Engagement Quotient (BeQ) model ................................ 29 2.7 EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT STRATEGIES ....................................................... 30 2.7.1 Leadership ................................................................................................... 31 2.7.2 Organisational justice ................................................................................... 32 2.7.3 Compensation and benefits .......................................................................... 32 2.7.4 Work policies and procedures ...................................................................... 33 2.7.5 Training and development ............................................................................ 34 2.8 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................... 35 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 36 3.2 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY ................................................................................. 36 3.3 SAMPLING .......................................................................................................... 37 3.3.1 Target population ......................................................................................... 37 3.3.2 Research sample ......................................................................................... 37 3.4 DATA COLLECTION ........................................................................................... 38 3.4.1 Measuring instruments ................................................................................. 39 vi 3.4.2 The data-collection process .......................................................................... 40 3.5 DATA ANALYSIS ................................................................................................ 40 3.6 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................ 41 3.6.1 Permission ................................................................................................... 41 3.6.2 Informed consent ......................................................................................... 41 3.6.3 Respect for anonymity and confidentiality .................................................... 42 3.6.4 Incorrect reporting ........................................................................................ 42 3.6.5 Harm to participants ..................................................................................... 43 3.6.6 Invasion of privacy........................................................................................ 43 3.6.7 Integrity and deception ................................................................................. 43 3.7 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................... 44 CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATION 4.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 45 4.2 RESPONSE RATE .............................................................................................. 45 4.3 DATA VALIDATION ............................................................................................. 46 4.3.1 Congeneric reliability .................................................................................... 46 4.3.2 Principal components analysis (PCA) ........................................................... 46 4.3.3 Analysis of variance (ANOVA) ...................................................................... 47 4.4 ANALYSIS OF BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION ................................................ 48 4.5 UWES QUESTIONNAIRE FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATION ......................... 52 4.5.1 Vigour........................................................................................................... 53 4.5.2 Dedication .................................................................................................... 53 4.5.3 Absorption .................................................................................................... 54 4.5.4 Engagement levels ....................................................................................... 55 4.6 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................... 59 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND PROPOSED STRATEGY 5.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 61 5.2 SUMMARY OF THE STUDY ............................................................................... 61 5.3 EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT STRATEGY ........................................................... 63 5.3.1 Continuous evaluation .................................................................................. 66 5.3.2 Performance appraisals, training, and communication ................................. 67 5.4 LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH .......................................................... 70 5.5 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................... 71 vii REFERENCES ................................................................................................................... 72 ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A: INFORMATION SHEET ............................................................................. 81 ANNEXURE B: QUESTIONNAIRE SECTION A ................................................................. 83 ANNEXURE C: QUESTIONNAIRE SECTION B ................................................................. 86 ANNEXURE D: INFORMED CONSENT FORM .................................................................. 87 ANNEXURE E: PERMISSION TO CONDUCT RESEARCH ............................................... 88 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1: Engagement levels .............................................................................. 13 Figure 2.2: Kahn’s 1990 model employee engagement ........................................ 16 Figure 2.3: A theoretical model of the antecedents and outcomes of employee engagement ........................................................................................ 18 Figure 2.4: The JD-R model .................................................................................. 20 Figure 2.5: Fleck and Inceoglu’s model of engagement ........................................ 22 Figure 2.6: Framework for understanding the elements of employee engagement ........................................................................................ 24 Figure 2.7: South African model of engagement ................................................... 26 Figure 2.8: The Benchmark of Engagement Model ............................................... 29 Figure 2.9: Drivers of employee engagement ....................................................... 31 Figure 4.1: PCA graph........................................................................................... 47 Figure 4.2: Mean for each of the questions pertaining to vigour ............................ 53 Figure 4.3: Mean for each of the questions pertaining to dedication ..................... 54 Figure 4.4: Mean for each of the questions pertaining to absorption ..................... 55 Figure 4.5: Engagement level per gender group ................................................... 55 Figure 4.6: Engagement level per age group ........................................................ 56 Figure 4.7: Tenure engagement levels .................................................................. 57 Figure 4.8: Engagement levels per employment category .................................... 57 Figure 4.9: Engagement levels per culture group .................................................. 58 Figure 4.10: Mean for each subscale as well as the total mean .............................. 59 Figure 5.1: The service-profit chain ....................................................................... 65 Figure 5.2: Illustration of the employee engagement strategy for Sparta Foods ... 66 Figure 5.3: Input elements of the employee engagement strategy ........................ 67 ix LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1: Behavioural patterns for the different engagement levels ................... 14 Table 2.2: Summary of the models of engagement ............................................. 27 Table 3.1: Stratified random sampling table ......................................................... 38 Table 4.1: Congeneric reliability values................................................................ 46 Table 4.2: ANOVA table ....................................................................................... 48 Table 4.3: Graphical depiction of responses according to gender ....................... 48 Table 4.4: Age distribution of the respondents ..................................................... 49 Table 4.5: Ethnicity distribution ............................................................................ 49 Table 4.6: Graphical depiction of respondents by employment level ................... 50 Table 4.7: Qualifications distribution .................................................................... 50 Table 4.8: Departmental distribution .................................................................... 51 Table 4.9: Work experience distribution ............................................................... 52 Table 4.10: Norm scores for the UWES-17 ............................................................ 52 Table 5.1: Individual scores of the UWES questionnaire ..................................... 64 x LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ANOVA Analysis of variance AOM Academy of Management B-BBEE Broad-based Black Economic Empowerment BeQ Benchmark of Engagement Quotient CEO Chief executive officer CFA Confirmatory factor analysis CIRT Centre for Innovation in Research and Teaching EE Employment equity EEI Employee Engagement Instrument HOD Head of department HR Human resource(s) HRD Human Resource Development JD-R Job demands-resources [model] PCA Principal components analysis UWES Utrecht Work Engagement Scale 1 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH PROBLEM 1.1 INTRODUCTION This research study aims to develop an employee engagement strategy for Sparta Foods (Pty) Ltd (hereafter referred to as Sparta Foods). The starting point for developing an employee engagement strategy, and in turn improving engagement, is to assess what the current position of the organisation is and to identify its strengths and weaknesses relating to engagement. This study will firstly provide an overview of the conceptualisation of employee engagement, the meaning and definition, the significant role it plays in organisations, as well as the effective measurement thereof. Thereafter the research problem and primary and secondary objectives are stated. The framework and methodology used for this study are also discussed. This study will also explore the background of Sparta Foods and its current situation relating to employee engagement. The research design, sampling strategy, and data-collection methods will be explained, and finally a thesis layout and conclusion will be provided. 1.2 BACKGROUND 1.2.1 Employee engagement Rodwell (in Rice, Marlow, & Masarech, 2012, p. 1) states that “when the engagement you want isn’t there, you don’t need a survey to tell you that. You can feel it when you walk into the room”. Employee engagement has been a topic of interest among academics and managers for the past two decades (Mohan & Nalini, 2016). In a short period of time, employee engagement, as a construct and area of research, has captured the interest of researchers and practitioners alike (Saks & Gruman, 2014) and it has been consistently rated as one of the top issues on the list of priorities of chief executive officers (CEOs) (Hoole, 2015). It has also become the main focus of attention of both academics and practitioners (Martins, 2015). Numerous studies have linked employee engagement to an array of favourable organisational outcomes such as increased productivity, organisational commitment, 2 job satisfaction, customer satisfaction, reduced intention to resign, and reduced accidents (Harter, Schmidt, & Hayes, 2002), and there are many claims that employee engagement is one of the key factors for the competitive advantage and success of organisations (Rich, Lepine, & Crawford 2010). The changing scenario in the world economy has placed special emphasis on the need for the enhanced performance of employees (Jha & Kumar, 2016). As organisations struggle to maintain a competitive edge in tough economic times, many business leaders will need to turn to new strategies to increase productivity and innovation, but they will not be able to effectively execute what is required for future growth if they do not have the ‘right’ people, focus on the ‘right’ things, and willingly invest their ‘discretionary effort’ towards achieving the strategy of the organisation (Holbeche, 2015). The need for organisations to maximise their employees’ inputs has also contributed to the increasing interest in employee engagement. Organisational needs are driven by intense, often global, competition, which is increasing the need for employees to be emotionally and cognitively committed to their company, their customers, and their work (Rothmann & Rothmann, 2010). The cost of getting employee engagement wrong includes emotional absence and passive behaviour by employees (Krishnaveni & Monica, 2016). Aon Hewitt (2016) suggests that disengaged employees will negatively impact the work experience of engaged employees and organisations will struggle to attract new talent, which would undoubtedly hurt the organisations’ bottom line. It is imperative that organisations and their leadership understand what is meant by employee engagement and the significant impact it can have on both the individual and the organisation itself (Imandin, 2015). The key to an organisation’s competitive edge in a world that is constantly changing is engaged employees (Macey & Schneider, 2008). 1.2.2 Background to Sparta Foods The Sparta Group was established in 1966 by Dirk van Reenen and is a family-owned company with over 50 years of heritage, experience, and knowledge in the meat industry. The group comprises of cattle feeding lots, farming concerns, an abattoir, and a meat processing plant (Sparta, 2017). 3 Sparta Foods is located in the town of Welkom in the Free State province. This abattoir is responsible for the slaughter of cattle and the processing of meat and meat products. More than 200 000 heads of cattle are slaughtered at this plant every year. This facility has the capacity to produce 400 tonnes of Sparta beef products daily and is centrally located to ensure ease of delivery across South Africa (Sparta, 2017). The majority of Sparta Foods’ workforce comprises employees who work in the different production departments of the plant. The bulk of the activities are production orientated and productivity thus plays an important role in the day-to-day activities of the workforce. If employees are not productive, it would be difficult for Sparta Foods to achieve the production goals it has set. Holbeche (2015, p. 185) suggests that “if leaders want their organisations to survive and thrive in today’s challenging times, they must become intensely focused on improving employee engagement”. Sparta Foods’ management has indicated that there has been a drastic increase in absenteeism over the last couple of years, which, according to Bika (2017), can be an indication that employee engagement is declining fast. There is a definite connection between absenteeism and employee disengagement. When employees do not show up to work on a regular basis, it is clear that there is a problem (Eisenhauer, 2015; Page, 2008). The high employee turnover rate that Sparta Foods is experiencing indicates that the time, money, and energy that go into on-boarding new employees are wasted. Employees leave soon after they are hired (Eisenhauer, 2015; Page, 2008). It is impossible for an organisation to move forward without a productive workforce. Keeping employees on task is difficult when they are not engaged in their work (Eisenhauer, 2015), and because Sparta Foods is mostly production orientated, productivity plays a huge role in its day-to-day activities. If organisations do not deal with actively disengaged employees, problems may develop throughout the organisation. Disengagement is contagious and causes low productivity and contribution. If management fails to address disengagement within the organisation, it may be a tacit signal to the rest of the workforce that the organisation will tolerate sub-par performance (Imandin, 2015). To address the disengagement of employees and to improve the engagement levels within the 4 organisation, an employee engagement strategy must be developed, implemented, and maintained (Page, 2008). 1.3 PROBLEM STATEMENT The problem is that Sparta Foods currently shows signs that the employee engagement levels of the organisation might not be at an optimal level. Employee engagement is closely linked to organisational performance outcomes, and if Sparta Foods could improve the current employee engagement levels within the organisation, it could lead to higher productivity, profitability, and employee retention. If employees are not engaged, and the organisation does not address it, this could not only cost the organisation in monetary value, but also contribute to lost managerial hours spent on improving the levels of performance of these employees. Low levels of employee engagement within Sparta Foods could have a significant impact on the employee turnover of the organisation, morale in the office, quality of products, and word-of-mouth promotion, to name but a few. 1.3.1 Research questions The study seeks to address the following research questions:  What does employee engagement mean, and how can it be defined and/or conceptualised?  What are the current levels of employee engagement at Sparta Foods?  How can the employee engagement levels of Sparta Foods be improved and the shortages addressed?  What strategies can be used to enhance employee engagement levels? 1.4 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY 1.4.1 Primary objective The primary objective of this study is to develop an employee engagement strategy for Sparta Foods. 5 1.4.2 Secondary objectives The secondary objectives of this study are as follows:  To conceptualise the construct of employee engagement.  To determine the current levels of employee engagement in Sparta Foods.  To determine how the employee engagement levels of Sparta Foods can be enhanced. 1.5 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 1.5.1 Research design A positivist epistemological approach was followed during this study. This approach assumes that only facts gained through observation (measurement) can be considered trustworthy. The role of the researcher in positivism studies is to collect data and interpret them in an objective way. This approach also assumes that the researcher is separate from and does not affect the outcomes of the research. The main goal when a quantitative research approach is followed is to determine the relationship between an independent variable and a dependent or outcome variable within a specific population. It focuses on gathering numerical data and information and transforming this information into usable statistics. Quantitative research is a structured method that uses measurable data obtained from different sources to formulate facts and to generalise them to groups of people. The purpose of quantitative research is to quantify a problem and to understand how prevalent it is by determining the projectable results of a larger population. 1.5.2 Sampling strategy Probability sampling was used to generate a representative sample. By using a process of selecting respondents at random, researchers largely eliminate bias from the selection of a sample (Bryman & Bell, 2011). Because the sample for this study should contain a proportional representation of the different departments within the organisation, the type of probability sampling that was used was stratified random sampling. Stratified random sampling is a method of 6 sampling that involves the division of the population into smaller groups, known as strata. The strata are formed based on the members’ shared attributes and/or characteristics. Stratified random sampling ensures that each subgroup of a given population is adequately represented within the whole sample population of a research study. The advantage of this type of sampling is that it captures key population characteristics in the sample that are proportional to the overall population (Bryman & Bell, 2011). The total population consists of 792 Sparta Foods employees. These employees work in different departments, which enables the population to be divided into strata with shared attributes and characteristics. There are a total of 26 departments within Sparta Foods and thus there were 26 strata for this study. Taking into account the non- statistical and statistical considerations, a random sample size of 400 was selected. The sample size of each stratum was proportionate to the total population size and was calculated by dividing the sample size by the population size and multiplying it by the stratum size. 1.5.3 Data-collection methods The primary data of the study were collected through a self-completion questionnaire that consisted of closed-ended questions. A portion of these questionnaires were web- based to accommodate employees who have access to the Internet and email, and the remainder of the questionnaires were hard copies that were distributed by each head of department (HOD). The benefit of using web-based options is that a link is forwarded to an individual, and when it is answered, the data are captured immediately on an online database (Nienaber & Martins, 2016). The advantage of using hard copies to gather information is that it is easy to administer and can be done in the middle of the night before a shift starts. No computer stations are needed and it also seems to be more reliable (Nienaber & Martins, 2016). 7 1.5.4 Ethical considerations Ethics has become a cornerstone for conducting effective and meaningful research. The integrity, reliability, and validity of research findings rely heavily on adherence to ethical principles. The researcher followed the appropriate guidelines for issues such as human rights, compliance with the law, conflicts of interest, and safety (Centre for Innovation in Research and Teaching [CIRT], 2017). 1.5.4.1 Permission Conducting a meaningful and worthwhile research study requires data from either a secondary or primary means of data collection. In order to gain entrance to an organisation to conduct research, formal permission must be obtained (Nwachukwu, 2015). 1.5.4.2 Informed consent Consent involves the procedure by which an individual chooses whether or not to participate in a study. Researchers should ensure that participants have a complete understanding of the purpose of the study and the methods used, as well as the risks involved and the demands placed upon them as participants. The consent obtained should be informed, explicit, voluntary, and documentable (Bryman & Bell, 2007). The respondents were given an introduction to this study and its purpose. They were informed of the possible risks and benefits of the research project, and written consent was obtained from all the respondents who completed the questionnaires. 1.5.4.3 Respect for anonymity and confidentiality The respondents completed the questionnaires anonymously and their identity cannot be linked to any personal responses. The researcher maintained confidentiality throughout all the stages of the study (Bryman & Bell, 2011). The respondents’ personal information was treated confidentially and the researcher prevented any use and communication of information that might inflict damage on the individuals who are the subjects of this research. 8 1.5.4.4 Incorrect reporting Correct and unbiased reporting of the findings of the study are important characteristics of ethical research practice. Ethical researchers do not report the findings of a study in a way that alters the findings to serve the interest of the researcher. Ethical researchers also do not fabricate or falsify data in their studies (Kumar, 2011). 1.5.4.5 Harm to participants The Academy of Management’s (AOM) Code of Ethical Conduct states that it is the responsibility of the researcher to carefully assess the possibility of harm to research participants, and, to the furthest extent possible, minimise the probability of harm (Bryman & Bell, 2011). It is important that researchers protect the welfare of respondents. This research did not cause any harm to respondents, whether it be physical or emotional. The respondents participated voluntarily, and the use of offensive, discriminatory, or other unacceptable language was avoided in the formulation of the questionnaire (Bryman & Bell, 2007). 1.5.4.6 Invasion of privacy The researcher ensured that the private information of the respondents, such as beliefs, attitudes, and opinions, were not shared with others without the respondents’ knowledge or consent. The researcher will also not intrude on the respondents’ privacy or abandon normal respect for the respondents’ values (Bryman & Bell, 2007). 1.5.4.7 Integrity and deception The researcher is responsible for the trustworthiness of her own research. Falsification, fabrication, plagiarism, and similar serious violations of good academic practice are incommensurate with trustworthiness. The researcher ensured that no intentional misrepresentation of facts related to the purpose, nature, or consequences of the investigation occurred (Bryman & Bell, 2007). 9 1.6 DEMARCATION OF THE FIELD STUDY The focus of the study was firstly to define and conceptualise the term “employee engagement”. This enabled the researcher to establish which was the best instrument for measuring the levels of engagement in Sparta Foods, taking into consideration the multicultural composition of the organisation. Once the levels of engagement were successfully established, an employee engagement strategy could be developed and implemented to address the areas that require improvement. The study was conducted at Sparta Foods situated in Welkom. This is the abattoir and meat processing plant division of the Sparta Group. The workforce of the organisation was involved in this research study. The field of the study is Human Resource Management. 1.7 THESIS LAYOUT This study will consist of the following chapters:  Chapter 1 – Introduction to the Research Problem  Chapter 2 – Employee Engagement  Chapter 3 – Research Methodology  Chapter 4 – Research Findings and Interpretations  Chapter 5 – Conclusions and Proposed Strategy 1.8 CONCLUSION This first chapter served as a brief introduction to the study. It is evident that if an organisation can create the correct conditions for improved levels of engagement and develop a behaviourally engaged workforce, it will have accomplished something that its competitors will find very difficult to imitate. The next chapter provides an in-depth review of literature pertaining to employee engagement, the levels and dimensions thereof, and the strategies linked to improved employee engagement. 10 CHAPTER 2: EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT 2.1 INTRODUCTION In Chapter 1 the reader was introduced to the scope of the study. An orientation was provided to the background, problem statement, methodology, and the ethical considerations of the study. Chapter 2 will present extensive theory on the meaning, conceptualisation, and definition of employee engagement, as well as the levels of employee engagement and the measurement thereof. Finally, the importance of an employee engagement strategy will be discussed. 2.2 CONCEPTUALISATION, MEANING, AND DEFINITION OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT Since the inception of the employee engagement concept, various meanings and definitions have been associated with and linked to this concept. It has been defined in many different ways by researchers and practitioners (Mohan & Nalini, 2016) and has attracted much empirical research; however, no agreement has been reached on its precise meaning (Bakker, Albrecht, & Leiter, 2011). To date, there is no one single and generally accepted definition of the term ‘employee engagement’, and Albrecht (2010) concluded that it is unlikely that there will be universal agreement about a single definition and the measurement of engagement, but that it is important that measures of engagement reflect what is conceptually at the core of the construct. The concept of employee engagement has been defined in many ways, to the extent that various studies often use the concept interchangeably with work engagement (Cole, Walter, Bedeian, & O’Boyle, 2012). According to Schaufeli and Salanova (2011), employee engagement is a much broader concept than work engagement, while Schaufeli (2013) states that employee engagement and work engagement are used interchangeably. Harter et al. (2002) and Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) suggest that employee engagement is referred to as the individuals’ involvement and satisfaction and enthusiasm for work, whereas work engagement is a multidimensional affective-cognitive measure of wellbeing. 11 Academics prefer to use the concept ‘work engagement’ because of the focus on the relationship employees have with their work activities (Nienaber & Martins, 2015; Schaufeli & Salanova, 2011). Consequently, much confusion is created by the misuse of the terms ‘employee engagement’ and ‘work engagement’ (Cole et al., 2012; Nienaber & Martins, 2016). As conceptualised by Kahn (1990), who is seen as the founder of engagement, engagement is a positive psychological state that consists of cognitive, emotional, and behavioural dimensions, and comprises two distinct yet related types, namely job engagement and organisational engagement (Saks, 2008), whereas Nienaber and Martins (2015) conceptualise employee engagement as engaged employees at both the individual and organisational level, who are fully absorbed in and enthusiastic about their work, and thus take positive action to further the organisation’s reputation and interests (Macey & Schneider, 2008; Harter et al., 2002). There are also those who view engagement as the positive antithesis for burnout (Schaufeli, Salanova, González-Roma, & Bakker, 2002; Schaufeli, 2017). According to Maslach and Leiter (1997), engagement and burnout are at opposite ends of a single continuum. Energy, involvement, and efficacy, which are the characteristics of engagement, are seen as the direct opposite of the three burnout dimensions, namely exhaustion, cynicism, and lack of accomplishment. Engagement, a concept in its own right, is thus defined as a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterised by vigour, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli et al., 2002; Schaufeli, 2013). Albrecht (2010) states that this is perhaps the most widely cited definition of engagement. Albrecht, Bakker, Gruman, Macey, and Saks (2015) state that considerable progress has been made with respect to clarifying and defining the employee engagement construct, distinguishing it from related, although not identical, constructs and understanding its antecedents and outcomes. Dozens of studies have been published on employee engagement, as well as several meta-analyses. However, there continues to be concerns about the meaning, measurement, and theory of employee engagement and, despite its popularity in the workplace, a precise definition remains elusive because of continued research and redefinition surrounding the topic (Du Plessis & Martins, 2017; Albrecht et al., 2015; Imandin, 2015). 12 Erickson (2005) and Macey and Schneider (2008) articulate the same view that engagement is above and beyond simple satisfaction with employment arrangements or basic loyalty to the employer – characteristics that most companies have measured for many years. Engagement, in contrast, is about passion and commitment – the willingness to invest oneself and expand one’s discretionary effort to help the employer succeed. For the purposes of this study, the terms ‘work engagement’ and ‘employee engagement’ are used interchangeably. Both these concepts refer to (1) the relationship the employee has with his/her work, and (2) the employees’ relationship with the organisation. Although direct definitions of engagement might differ, all include the line of thought that engagement is concerned with the emotional commitment of the employee to the organisation, taking into account the discretionary effort they are willing to expend on behalf of their employer. The definition of engagement that will therefore be adopted for this study is based on the conceptualisation of Schaufeli et al. (2002), who define engagement as a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterised by vigour, dedication, and absorption. This correlates with Kahn’s (1990) conceptualisation, that engagement is the harnessing of employees to their work roles and them being able to express themselves physically, cognitively, emotionally, and mentally during their work performance. Both indicate that engagement refers to the state of mind of the employee towards the organisation and their work role, as well as the levels of effort and emotional commitment to their work and organisation. These levels of effort by employees can be measured and studies have indicated that four different levels of engagement exist, which will be discussed in the following section. 2.3 LEVELS OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT One of the reasons employee engagement has received so much attention is that it is believed to be associated with important employee and organisational outcomes. Various studies have found that employee engagement is related to higher commitment by employees, better health conditions, enhanced performance, and lower turnover intentions (Saks & Gruman, 2014). 13 Four levels of employee engagement have been identified (Page, 2008; Harshita, 2015; Bhuvanaiah & Raya, 2015; Jha & Kumar, 2016). Page’s (2008) model (see Figure 2.1) consists of two dimensions. The first dimension is employees’ attitude, whether positive or negative, towards the organisation, their colleagues, and the customers they serve. The second dimension is their level of enthusiasm and their drive towards activity, be it positive (active) or negative (inactive). Employee engagement can be divided into the following four levels: 1) Actively engaged – positive attitude and action orientated; 2) Actively disengaged – negative attitude and action orientated; 3) Engaged – positive attitude but not action orientated; and 4) Disengaged – Negative attitude and not action orientated. Figure 2.1: Engagement levels Source: Koban Page (2008, p. 13) The degree to which people demonstrate a positive attitude and their type and levels of activity can be translated into likely engagement patterns. Table 2.1 presents the behavioural patterns that can be seen with regard to the different levels of engagement, as well as the characteristic phrases each type may use (Page, 2008). Inaction Action Engaged Actively Engaged Disengaged Actively Disengaged Positive attitude Negative attitude 14 Table 2.1: Behavioural patterns for the different engagement levels Source: Koban Page (2008, pp. 10-13) According to Page (2008), employee engagement is personified by the passion employees have to give their best to the organisation and it is about the willingness and ability of employees to make sustained discretionary effort to help the organisation succeed. Employees who are disengaged can be turned into engaged employees when management creates the right opportunities and guides them towards achieving their personal goals. Actively disengaged employees will no longer benefit the Level of engagement Behavioural patterns Characteristic phrases Actively disengaged - Negative attitude towards change "I won't" (Cynics) - Very vocal about their dissatisfaction "I can't" - Always focus on the negative - Criticise ideas and solutions Disengaged - Negative attitude and lacking drive "I won't" (Victims) - Negative approach towards new ideas "I can't" - Do not take an active part in organisational life - Avoid confronting issues - Avoid risk - Do the minimum - Lack of confidence means they do not seek other employment or put in an effort to improve their current working life Engaged - Reluctant towards change "I would" (Yes men) - The are not actively engaged or disengaged "I could" - Avoid taking risks - Keep a low profile - just drift along - Do not like to draw attention to themselves - Comfortable watching from the sideline Actively engaged - Positive attitude towards change "I will" (Stars) - High energy "I can" - Enthusiastic - Give discretionary effort to serve customers - Realistic about obstacles and how to overcome them - Likes to be challenged and stretched 15 organisation in any way (Bhuvanaiah & Raya, 2015). The levels of engagement are determined by measuring the different dimensions relating to engagement. 2.4 DIMENSIONS OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT Based on the perspectives of Kahn (1990), Schaufeli et al. (2002), Schaufeli and Bakker (2004), Page (2008), Macey and Schneider (2008), Jha and Kumar (2016), and Nienaber and Martins (2016), employee engagement comprises at least three dimensions. The first dimension is a physical component, also described as vigour and trait engagement. This dimension refers to high levels of energy and mental resilience at work, the willingness to invest in one’s work activities, and persistence in difficult circumstances. This includes employees’ attitude, whether positive or negative, towards the organisation, their colleagues, and the customers they serve (Kahn, 1990; Schaufeli et al., 2002; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; Nienaber & Martins, 2016). The second dimension is a cognitive component, also referred to as dedication and state engagement. Dedication is characterised by a sense of significance, enthusiasm, pride, inspiration, and challenge in relation to one’s work, and has been defined as the degree to which an employee psychologically relates to his or her job and the work performed therein. This includes the level of enthusiasm of employees and their drive towards activity, whether active or inactive (Kahn, 1990; Schaufeli et al., 2002; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; Nienaber & Martins, 2016). The third dimension is an emotional component, also referred to as absorption or behavioural engagement. Absorption refers to the feeling of being focused on one’s work and finding detaching oneself from work activities difficult. It entails a pleasant state in which employees are totally immersed in their work, forgetting about everything else. Imandin, Bisschoff, and Botha (2014) state that behavioural engagement can be understood as the direct levels of effort towards achieving organisational goals (see also Kahn, 1990; Schaufeli et al., 2002; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; Nienaber & Martins, 2016). Just as there are several conceptualisations of engagement, there are also several models and theories of engagement (Saks & Gruman, 2014). The origin of these models stems from two primary areas of research, 16 namely the needs-satisfying approach of Kahn (1990) and the burnout-antithesis approach of Maslach, Schaufeli, and Leiter (2001) and Schaufeli et al. (2002). 2.5 MODELS OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT A number of theoretical perspectives have been proposed that each emphasises a different aspect of employee engagement; however, these perspectives cannot be integrated into one overarching conceptual model. Four approaches are discussed in the following sections. 2.5.1 Kahn’s model of engagement Kahn’s model (1990) of engagement (see Figure 2.2) is considered the first grounded model of personal engagement and personal disengagement. Figure 2.2: Kahn’s 1990 model employee engagement Source: William Kahn (1990, p. 704) According to this model, employees can be engaged on three different levels, namely physical, emotional, and cognitive levels. The model emphasises that there are three psychological conditions that are associated with these levels of engagement, namely meaningfulness, availability, and safety. Kahn (1990) found that employees were much more engaged in work situations that offered them more psychological 17 meaningfulness and safety and they were psychologically available (Phadi & Panda, 2015). While Kahn’s (1990) work is regarded as the starting point for engagement research, his work has not been extensively empirically tested. Even though his model did not receive extensive empirical interest, research on engagement did not come to a halt (Raatikainen, 2015). Kahn’s (1990) work conceptualised employee engagement and is therefore considered a seminal work on the topic that has contributed significantly to developing the concept further. 2.5.2 A theoretical model of the antecedents and outcomes of employee engagement Rana, Ardichvili, and Tkachenko (2014) used Dubin’s (1978) method to propose a theoretical model of the antecedents and outcomes of employee engagement, illustrated in Figure 2.3. Dubin’s (1978) theory-building method is widely recognised and regarded as one of the most comprehensive theory-building methods available. It is based on two distinct and related conceptual and methodological components. At a conceptual level, this method can be presented as a continuous theory-research cycle composed of two parts; the first being the theoretical side and the second the research operation side. Successful completion of the first part of the cycle results in an informed, conceptual framework of the theory, whereas successful completion of the second part results in an empirically verified and trustworthy theory (Lynham, 2002). The major antecedents of employee engagement (see left-hand side of Figure 2.3) were identified as job design and characteristics, supervisor and co-worker relationships, workplace environment, and individual characteristics (Rana et al., 2014). 18 Figure 2.3: A theoretical model of the antecedents and outcomes of employee engagement Source: Sowath Rana et al. (2014, p. 31) Job design and characteristics According to Kahn (1990), meaningfulness is one of the three main psychological conditions that influence an employee’s engagement and disengagement at work. Rana et al. (2014) suggest that meaningfulness thus plays an important role in engaging employees and management should therefore seek to enhance meaningfulness through effective job design and characteristics. Supervisor and co-worker relationships Kahn (1990) argues that the psychological condition of safety, where employees feel they are able to try and fail without fearing the consequence, is vastly influenced by the employees’ interpersonal relationships, the group and intergroup dynamics within 19 the organisation, as well as the management style. The psychological condition of safety will thus enhance engagement and Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) provide empirical support for this relationship between engagement and social support from co-workers and supervisors. Employees would feel safe to voice their ideas and would see criticism as constructive rather than destructive (Rana et al., 2014). Workplace environment The workplace environment consists of co-workers, supervisors, the policies and procedures of the organisation, physical resources, as well as intangible elements such as supportive work climate and perceived levels of safety. The workplace environment is integral to having engaged employees (Rana et al., 2014). According to Schaufeli and Bakker (2004), employees should be provided with adequate physical, psychological, social, and organisational resources that will enable them to reduce job demands, to function effectively in their work role, and to stimulate their own personal development and growth. Individual characteristics Rana et al. (2014) suggest that individual characteristics could be antecedents to employee engagement. These individual characteristics can thus be very powerful in impacting on an individual’s level of engagement at work. Rana et al. (2014) propose that optimism, high-achievement orientation, conscientiousness, and self-efficacy are salient antecedents of employee engagement. Job demands and employee perceptions of Human Resource Development (HRD) practices serve as important moderators to the relationship between the abovementioned antecedents. Employee engagement, in turn, plays a very important role in improving employees’ job performance and the organisation’s employee turnover, as well as enhancing employees’ organisational citizenship behaviour (Rana et al., 2014). In this model, engagement refers to employees’ cognitive, emotional, and physical state (Kahn, 1990) that is influenced by certain antecedents. This cognitive, emotional, and physical state of engagement translates into favourable outcomes to the extent that when engaged, employees will express themselves cognitively, emotionally, and 20 behaviourally (Schaufeli et al., 2002). The job demands-resources (JD-R) model developed by Schaufeli (2013) is also based on the outcomes of the emotional state of the employee. 2.5.3 The job demands-resources (JD-R) model The JD-R model (see Figure 2.4) was introduced more than a decade ago to enable researchers to understand job burnout. In recent years, the model has been supplemented with work engagement, which is a positive, fulfilling psychological state characterised by vigour, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli et al., 2002; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; Nienaber & Martins, 2016; Schaufeli, 2017). Figure 2.4: The JD-R model Source: Wilmar Schaufeli (2013, p. 8) A host of studies on work engagement have used this model as an explanatory framework (Bakker et al., 2011). These studies particularly relate to those who believe that engagement is the antithesis of burnout (Schaufeli et al., 2002; Schaufeli, 2017; Schaufeli & Salanova, 2011). According to this model, all jobs consist of two different categories, namely job demands and job resources. Schaufeli (2017) defines job demands as the aspects of a job that require sustained mental or physical effort. These are the negative aspects at work that drain energy, like conflict with others, job insecurity, and work overload (Bakker & Demerouti, 2014). In contrast, job resources 21 are the good aspects that are defined (Schaufeli, 2017) as the aspects of the job that are functional at achieving work goals, reducing job demands and the associated ‘costs’ (physiological and psychological), and stimulating personal growth and development (Albrecht, 2010; Demerouti & Bakker, 2011; Schaufeli, 2013). According to this model, job resources will energise employees, make them focus on their efforts, and encourage them to persist. Resources thus foster engagement in terms of vigour, dedication, and absorption. This engagement will produce positive outcomes such as job performance. The model postulates that work engagement mediates the relationship between job and personal resources and positive outcomes, which is called the motivational process (Albrecht, 2010; Bhuvanaiah & Raya, 2015; Schaufeli, 2013). The reduced health/energy process is ignited by job demands. These job demands are the aspects of an employee’s job that require sustained physical or mental effort. If this is high, additional effort will be required to achieve work goals. This additional effort comes with physical and psychological costs such as irritability and fatigue. When recovery is not sufficient, employees may gradually use up all their backup energy, which can eventually lead to burnout. This may lead to negative outcomes for the organisation and will diminish engagement levels (Albrecht, 2010; Bhuvanaiah & Raya, 2015; Schaufeli, 2013). Cross-links also exist between the reduced health process and the motivational process. This suggests that poor resources may lead to burnout, whereas job demands may increase work engagement. However, this may only be true for job demands that promote personal growth and future gains (Albrecht, 2010; Schaufeli, 2013). This theory is very flexible and can be applied to all work environments. It can be tailored to the specific occupation under consideration (Bakker & Demerouti, 2014) and will assist organisations in the development process that aims to increase work engagement and prevent burnout. The model will also play a major role in prioritising and implementing future actions to increase engagement (Schaufeli, 2017). Fleck and Inceoglu’s (2010) model of engagement also indicates that engagement is related to the state people are in when they perform their work. This correlates with the findings of both Kahn (1990) and Schaufeli (2013). 22 2.5.4 Fleck and Inceoglu’s model of engagement Fleck and Inceoglu (in Albrecht, 2010, p. 76) found that due to the diverse conceptualisations of employee engagement, it becomes problematic when recommendations for actions must be made and when accumulating a coherent body of research knowledge. The model of engagement (see Figure 2.5) was developed to address these issues and the main aim of the model was to develop and offer a definition of engagement. Figure 2.5: Fleck and Inceoglu’s model of engagement Source: Simon Albrecht (2010, p. 76) Two principles form the core starting point of this model. Firstly, that engagement is the state people are in when they perform their work. This means that the intensity of this state may vary over time. Secondly, that it is necessary to separate the predictors of the state of engagement, the state of engagement itself, and the consequences of being in this state. Deploying these principles may help resolve many problems that are associated with other definitional approaches to employee engagement (Albrecht, 2010). On the left-hand side of the model are the drivers of engagement. These drivers represent the characteristics of the work environment within the organisation. This work environment is expected to play a crucial role in determining employees’ state of engagement. As Kahn (1990) states, organisational context enhances or undermines people’s motivation and sense of work. These drivers of engagement will lead to higher levels of employee engagement, which in turn will motivate employees to more 23 frequently demonstrate behaviours that are beneficial to the organisation. When employees demonstrate these behaviours, both they and the organisation will experience secondary benefits (indicated on the right side of the figure) (Albrecht, 2010). Organisations will be able to see a positive impact on turnover, customer satisfaction, profitability, and staff turnover, while employees will experience higher levels of job satisfaction. This will ensure a feeling of wellbeing among employees and they will find that they are making more career progress. The employees’ personal dispositions are expected to influence many elements of this model. These dispositions are likely to play a role in how frequently employees become engaged. They play a key role in understanding behavioural outcomes such as job satisfaction, effort, and wellbeing (Albrecht, 2010). Macey and Schneider’s (2008) model, discussed in the following section, not only focuses on state engagement, but also includes trait and behavioural engagement. 2.5.5 Macey and Schneider’s tri-dimensional model of engagement Macey and Schneider (2008) used the tri-dimensional model of engagement (see Figure 2.6) to present a conceptual framework to assist researchers to recognise the variety of meanings employee engagement subsumes and the research that supports these meanings. This model shows that engagement is the positive disposition of employees, characterised by enthusiasm. It shows how workplace conditions, including the nature of the work (e.g. challenge and variety) and the nature of leadership, affect the engagement of employees. The nature of leadership has a direct effect on trust, which is a core requirement of an engaged workforce (Kelly.co.za, 2017). 24 Figure 2.6: Framework for understanding the elements of employee engagement Source: William Macey and Benjamin Schneider (2008, p. 6) Macey and Schneider (2008) consider employee engagement as not only a set of constructs, but also as a tightly integrated set, interrelated in known ways, and comprising clearly identifiable constructs with relationships to a common outcome. They distinguish three broad conceptualisations of employee engagement, namely state engagement, trait engagement, and behavioural engagement. They propose that trait engagement comprises a number of interrelated personality attributes, including trait positive affectivity, conscientiousness, the proactive personality, and the autotelic personality. These all suggest the inclination to experience work in positive, active, and energetic ways and to behave adaptively in displaying effort in going beyond what is necessary and initiating change to facilitate relevant outcomes. In this sense, trait engagement would be a significant cause of and be directly related to state engagement and indirectly to behavioural engagement (Macey & Schneider, 2008). State engagement can be defined from two perspectives, namely engagement as an extension of the self to a role (Kahn, 1990), and employees’ work activities as a reference for engagement (Bakker et al., 2011; Schaufeli et al., 2002). Macey and Schneider (2008) propose that state engagement concerns positive affectivity associated with the job and the work setting connoting or explicitly indicating feelings of persistence, vigour, energy, dedication, absorption, enthusiasm, alertness, and (Positive view of work and life) (Feelings of energy, absorption) (Extra-role behaviour) Proactive personality Satisfaction (affective) Autotelic personality Involvement Trait positive affect Commitment Proactive/personal initiative Conscientiousness Empowerment Role expansion Adaptive Trust Work attributes Variety Challenge Autonomy Trait engagement State engagement Behavioural engagement Organisational citizenship behaviour Transformational Leadership 25 pride. As such, state engagement has components of organisational commitment, job involvement, and the positive affectivity components of job satisfaction (Macey & Schneider, 2008). Behavioural engagement follows from state engagement and is broadly defined as adaptive behaviour. Adaptive behaviour is a useful concept for describing a range of behaviours that support organisational effectiveness. What is common is the fundamental notion that engagement behaviours are typically not prescribed and that they go beyond preserving the status quo to instead focus on initiating or fostering change in the sense of doing more and/or something different (Macey & Schneider, 2008). Another model that was developed based on Kahn’s (1990) conceptualisation is the South African model of engagement by Kock and McNamara (2010). This model focuses on the state of mind of employees when they perform their work. 2.5.6 A South African model of engagement Kock and McNamara (2010) developed a South African employee engagement model (see Figure 2.7) that is based on Kahn’s (1990) conceptualisation. Kahn (1990) states that employee engagement, as a psychological state where employees connect and identify with the personal, job, and organisational dimensions of their work, results in retention and improved performance. This model integrates important factors that contribute to employee engagement, such as the relationship between team members and supervisors (Kock & McNamara, 2010). According to Kock and McNamara (2010), employee engagement is driven by three key factors. The first factor is the relationship employees have with their direct manager; secondly their belief in senior leadership; and thirdly the pride they have of the organisation they work for. 26 Figure 2.7: South African model of engagement Source: Ruwayne Kock and Kent McNamara (2010, p. 2) The model can be applied to assess engagement in organisations and the degree of connectedness among employees to their jobs and the organisation. The results can provide a guide to identifying measures for retaining competencies and experience (Kock & McNamara, 2010). All the models discussed in this chapter suggest that engagement is influenced by the psychological state of the employee. Employees will be much more engaged in work situations that offer them more psychological meaningfulness (job enrichment, work- role fit, and work interactions), safety (interpersonal relationships, group dynamics, and organisational norms), and psychological availability (physical and emotional energies). The antecedents and drivers identified by each of the models (see Table 2.2) are very similar and it can be concluded that the emotional state of the employee will be influenced by their direct work role and the stimulation they receive from their day-to-day tasks, the relationships they have with management and their peers, the culture of the organisation, and the tools available to them for personal growth and development. 27 Table 2.2: Summary of the models of engagement Model Author (Year) State of engagement Antecedents / Drivers Kahn's model Kahn (1990) (1) Physical (2) Emotional (3) Cognitive (1) Meaningfulness (2) Availability (3) Safety A theoretical model of the antecedents and outcomes of engagement Rana et al. (2014) (1) Physical (2) Emotional (3) Cognitive (1) Job design and characteristics (2) Supervisor and co-worker relationships (3) Workplace environment (4) Individual characteristics JD-R model Schaufeli (2013) (1) Physical (2) Emotional (3) Cognitive (1) Vigour (2) Dedication (3) Absorption Fleck and Inceoglu’s model of engagement Fleck and Inceoglu (2010) (1) Psychological (1) Person-job fit (2) Person-organisation fit Macey and Schneider’s tri- dimensional model of engagement Macey and Schneider (2008) (1) Positive disposition of employees (1) Work attributes (2) Transformational leadership and trust A South African model of engagement Kock and McNamara (2010) (1) Psychological (1) Job resources (2) Personal resources These models served as the basis for developing various methods to measure the impact the antecedents and drivers of engagement have on the psychological state of employees. 2.6 MEASURING EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT Given the lack of consensus on the meaning and definition of employee engagement, it should not be surprising that there have also been concerns about how to measure employee engagement (Saks & Gruman, 2014). The popularity of this concept has given rise to a number of studies by academics and practitioners who all promote their own measuring instruments. In a number of instances, these measuring instruments have been validated for a specific population group, organisation, sector, or cultural group (Martins, 2015). 28 2.6.1 The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) To measure employee engagement, Schaufeli et al. (2002) developed the self-report UWES. Vigour, dedication, and absorption are addressed, and are regarded as central features of the construct of employee engagement (Nienaber & Martins, 2016; Schaufeli, 2013). This scale has been validated and used in a number of countries, including South Africa. To date, most academic research on engagement has used the UWES (Schaufeli, 2013), and it is the preferred measurement instrument based on extensive empirical research studies that have shown its psychometric properties to assess engagement (Nienaber & Martins, 2016). Compared to needs satisfaction, the UWES refers to work engagement rather than personal engagement and proposes that engaged employees are likely to perform better than their disengaged colleagues (Nienaber & Martins, 2016). 2.6.2 The Employee Engagement Instrument (EEI) The EEI was developed by Nienaber and Martins (2015) for a diverse, multicultural environment. This scale measures employee engagement concurrently at the individual and organisational level. The instrument consists of two sections: one that collects biographical and/or demographic information, and one that solicits responses, using a five-point Likert scale, to statements regarding engagement at the individual level, team/departmental level, and organisational level. Nienaber and Martins (2016) validated this instrument and their study proved that researchers can use the questionnaire with confidence. Both the factor analysis and the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) confirmed its validity and reliability, and CFA statistics explain that the theoretical specification of the factors matches the constructs of employee engagement adequately (Nienaber & Martins, 2016). 2.6.3 Imandin’s theoretical model to measure employee engagement Imandin (2015) developed a theoretical model to measure employee engagement based on her theoretical study and the identified constructs. Imandin (2015) tested the framework in her doctoral thesis and found that it provided a theoretical framework for empirical research to measure employee engagement in South Africa. It also ensured that a wide array of employee engagement constructs and their context of previous 29 application were identified. This is a sound methodological approach that is strongly recommended (Imandin, 2015). 2.6.4 The Benchmark of Engagement Quotient (BeQ) model The primary objectives of the BeQ model (see Figure 2.8) are to explore the relations between perceptions that influence organisational engagement and the unleashing of individual voices, to understand the underlying assumptions as they pertain to the individual, the group, and the organisation; to determine the level of engagement within the organisation; and to describe the over-cultural dynamics and consider the implications thereof for the organisation (Nienaber & Martins, 2016). Figure 2.8: The Benchmark of Engagement Model Source: Hester Nienaber and Nico Martins (2016, p. 44) The BeQ model considers the multicultural interpretation of the various subconstructs on individual, group, organisational, and over-cultural domains. This questionnaire is customised to measure the unique business needs that present themselves to the Assumptions about They Respect Regard Personal responsibility Competence Support Leadership Flexibility Valuing diversity Accountability Trust Alignment Adaptability Ethics Inclusivity Worldview Assumptions about Me Climate Assumptions about We Culture The organisation The team The individual 30 leaders of organisations, and to include dynamics unique to the country in which the organisation operates (Nienaber & Martins, 2016). The BeQ model is not a one-time measure of where the organisation finds itself. Instead, it is a philosophy of how to rewire the energy in a system in a positive way, taking diverse worldviews into account. This methodology is not a quick check but rather an organisational development process (Nienaber & Martins, 2016). Given the definition adopted for this study, the UWES is considered the best-suited measurement instrument. The UWES (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004) is currently the most widely used and validated measurement instrument and assesses vigour, dedication, and absorption, which are characteristics of a positive psychological state. Once the engagement levels have been determined, it will be possible to identify organisational strengths in terms of engagement, as well as areas that are in need of improvement. Once the areas of development are clear and the levels of disengagement have been determined, suitable engagement strategies can be developed to address these areas. 2.7 EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT STRATEGIES Page (2008) suggests that the starting point when developing an employee engagement strategy is to firstly assess where the organisation currently stands in terms of engagement. This should allow the organisation to determine its strengths, and based on the feedback, determine areas that require improvement. As stated by Markos and Sridevi (2010), there is a lack of sufficient literature on what the challenges leaders face could be when they aim to improve engagement levels. Most research that has been conducted on the concept of employee engagement focused on identifying the drivers that lead to engagement, but failed to indicate clearly articulated strategies to engage employees in their work. The drivers of employee engagement, as identified by Dajani (2015) (see Figure 2.9), will be used as the basis for the employee engagement strategies proposed by this research. 31 Figure 2.9: Drivers of employee engagement Source: Maha Dajani (2015, p. 141) Employee engagement should not only be a one-time exercise; it should be integrated into the culture of the organisation. It should also be a continuous process of learning, improvement, and action (Bedarkar & Pandita, 2014). Management should attempt to fulfil employees’ expectations (see left side of Figure 2.8), which will lead to improved engagement, job performance, and organisational commitment. 2.7.1 Leadership Leadership has been found to be a significant antecedent of engagement. Effective leadership should support communication of information, transparency, respectful treatment of employees, and organisational standards of ethical behaviour (Dajani, 2015). Employee engagement requires commitment from leadership through establishing a clear mission, vision, and organisational values. Unless the people at the top believe in it, own it, and pass it down to managers and employees, employee engagement will never be more than just another concept (Markos & Sridevi, 2010). Davila and Piña-Ramirez (2013) argue that managers have the responsibility to foster engagement. This responsibility comes through in the way they enable employees to do their work, how they conduct themselves, and how they convey messages through different channels. Breevaart, Bakker, Demerouti, and Derksshows (2016) found that 32 transformational leadership and self-leadership both have a positive relationship with employee engagement and performance. 2.7.2 Organisational justice Organisational justice refers to the ethical manner in which organisations treat their employees. It is based on fairness perceptions, and if employees feel that they are treated fairly within the organisation, they will reciprocate by putting more effort into their work and as a result increase their engagement, in accordance with the exchange ideology (Dajani, 2015). If communication is improved between leadership and employees, it could contribute to organisational justice. Employees will feel free to voice their concerns and to point out issues relating to fairness. Communication is seen a driver of employee engagement (Bedarkar & Pandita, 2014), and organisations must recognise the importance of strengthening internal communication with their employees. Internal communication assists in building a culture of transparency between management and employees, and it engages employees in the organisation’s priorities. Efforts to build trust with employees through communication can provide benefits for both employees and the organisation and can enhance the employee engagement within the organisation (Mishra, Boynton, & Mishra, 2014). Managers should promote two-way communication and should be clear and consistent regarding what is expected from employees. This will pave the way for employee engagement (Markos & Sridevi, 2010). 2.7.3 Compensation and benefits Compensation and benefits are indispensable antecedents to employee engagement, which involve both financial rewards and non-financial benefits such as recognition (Dajani, 2015). Psychological meaningfulness (Kahn, 1990) is critical for the development of employee engagement (McManus & Mosca, 2015). Employees must feel that their efforts are meaningful. The implementation of an employee reward and recognition system is probably one of the most important drivers for increased engagement (McManus & Mosca, 2015; Gose & Mohanty, 2016). Maslach et al. (2001) suggest 33 that while a lack of reward and recognition can lead to burnout, appropriate recognition and reward are important for engagement. Management should develop both financial and non-financial benefits for employees that are linked to increased performance and engagement in their day-to-day actions. Several management theories have indicated that when employees receive more pay, recognition, and praise, they tend to exert more effort in their jobs. A clear link should be visible between performance and the incentives given to employees (Markos & Sridevi, 2010). Performance management systems can have a direct positive influence on employee engagement and downstream attitudinal, behavioural, and organisational outcomes. They can also have an indirect influence on engagement through their impact on organisational climate, perceptions of job demands and resources, and on the associated feelings of meaningfulness, safety, and availability that employees experience. Rewards and recognition programmes and strategies clearly have an impact on the fulfilment employees receive on the three dimensions of employee engagement as identified by Kahn (1990), Schaufeli et al. (2002), Schaufeli and Bakker (2004), and Nienaber and Martins (2016). This aligns to the five performance management activities that influence engagement, as identified by Mone and London (2018). These activities include providing ongoing feedback and recognition, development of performance and development goals, management of employee development, conducting appraisals, and creating a climate of trust and empowerment. For these strategies and programmes to be successful, management should show commitment to them as these will be essential to ensuring the effectiveness thereof (McManus & Mosca, 2015; Gose & Mohanty, 2016). 2.7.4 Work policies and procedures To create a culture of engagement, human resources (HR) systems must work hand in hand with other managerial practices when dealing with employees (Dajani, 2015). Effective orientation programmes are the first building blocks to ensuring employee retention. New employees should be given general orientation as well as job-specific orientation when they start working at an organisation. Organisations must aim to reduce newcomers’ anxiety and uncertainty and to build on newcomers’ entry 34 excitement and enthusiasm and translate these into high levels of engagement (Albrecht et al., 2015). An orientation programme should ensure that newcomers are familiar with the mission, vision, policies, and procedures of the organisation, as well as the responsibilities that directly relate to their jobs. They should also be informed about the current priorities of the department to which they belong in order to enable them to develop realistic job expectations and to reduce the role conflict that might arise in the future. After the hiring decision is made, management must ensure role- talent fit when placing the new employee in a certain position and exert all managerial efforts needed to retain that talent (Markos & Sridevi, 2010). Kock and McNamara (2010) concluded in their study that retention strategies should focus more on the personal meaningfulness of the work than merely on job and organisational connectedness. The employee value proposition should emphasise the personal factors for the attraction and retention of talent. Engagement is an outcome of healthy culture and motivated employees, and top- performing organisations have realised that an employee engagement strategy, which is linked to bottom-line outcomes, will help them win in the marketplace (Evangeline & Ragavan, 2016). Organisations should promote a strong work culture in which the goals and values of managers are aligned across all work sections. Companies that build a culture of mutual respect by keeping success stories alive not only keep their existing employees engaged but also “baptise” new incoming employees with this contagious spirit of work culture (Markos & Sridevi, 2010). 2.7.5 Training and development Training and development are important drivers of engagement and are consistent with the scope of job resources proposed in the JD-R model (Schaufeli, 2013; Dajani, 2015). As previously noted, according to the JD‐R theory (Schaufeli et al., 2002; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; Nienaber & Martins, 2016; Schaufeli, 2017), work engagement is most likely to develop when employees are presented with challenging job demands in combination with high job resources. The JD‐R model also includes a feedback loop, which represents a positive gain cycle that describes that employees who are engaged are more able to create their own resources, which then, over time, fosters further engagement. Albrecht et al. (2015) used the JD‐R model to indicate 35 how organisations can improve employee engagement through training and development. Three interventions to facilitate employee engagement were identified: organisations should provide the optimal mix of job demands and resources, they should optimise personal resources through training, and they should encourage employees to engage in job crafting. Organisations can generate meaningfulness (Kahn, 1990) by giving employees the opportunity to develop their own knowledge base and skills set. Management should enable employees to update themselves by increasing their knowledge and skills through appropriate training. If employees learn more about their job, their confidence levels will increase by them being able to work without much supervision from their immediate managers, which in turn will build their self-efficacy and commitment (Markos & Sridevi, 2010). Providing employees with ongoing training opportunities to develop their knowledge promotes new skills, builds their confidence, and reduces fear and job insecurities (McManus & Mosca, 2015). Robinson, Perryman, and Hayday (2004) state that employees should foster self-development behaviours to voluntarily improve their own knowledge, skills, and abilities in such a way as to be helpful to the organisation. This will lead to organisational citizenship behaviour (Rana et al., 2014), which requires a long-term focus that implies commitment to the organisation extending well into the future. 2.8 CONCLUSION This chapter identified the different conceptualisations and definitions of engagement by means of an extensive literature review on the topic. This was followed by a discussion and comparison of the different schools of thought relating to engagement and the various models designed to better understand the concept. The measurement instruments were also discussed, and the instrument used in this research was identified. The purpose of an employee engagement strategy and the different drivers used to develop this strategy were also discussed. The next chapter addresses the methodology adopted in this study. 36 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 INTRODUCTION It is evident from reviewing existing research that engagement can affect an organisation in various ways. Engagement can influence the financial as well as non- financial performance of organisations (Jha & Kumar, 2016), and knowing the levels of engagement within an organisation can serve as the basis of a strategy to enhance the performance and productivity of employees. Improved engagement will enable employees to realise their responsibility towards group dynamics and will develop positive attitudes and behaviours among the workforce (Jha & Kumar, 2016). The objective of this study is to develop an employee engagement strategy that will assist the organisation in addressing the problems associated with low levels of employee engagement. The levels of engagement within the organisation were determined, which served as the basis for the development of the strategy. The research question and objectives were outlined in Chapter 1. The purpose of this chapter is to explain this study’s research strategy, which includes the research methodology adopted for the execution of this research. 3.2 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY Research philosophy deals with the source, nature, and development of knowledge. It is the belief of how data about a phenomenon should be gathered, analysed, and used (Bryman & Bell, 2007). Epistemology is a philosophical approach that deals with what sources of knowledge can be regarded as acceptable in a discipline (Bryman & Bell, 2007). There are several different sources of knowledge within a research philosophy. The sources of knowledge related to business research in particular are intuitive knowledge, authoritarian knowledge, logical knowledge, and empirical knowledge. The research process may integrate all of these sources of knowledge within a single study (Kumar, 2011). Positivism is an epistemological approach (Bryman & Bell, 2007) that enables a researcher to obtain an overview of society as a whole and to uncover social trends. 37 This type of sociology is more interested in identifying patterns and trends and looks for relationships or correlations between two or more variables. A quantitative method with good reliability and representativeness, like a structured questionnaire, is preferred by the positivist approach (Bryman & Bell, 2011) and can be described as an approach that necessitates the collection of data in numerical order and regards the relationship between theory and research as empirical (Bryman & Bell, 2007). A positivist quantitative approach was adopted for this study. 3.3 SAMPLING 3.3.1 Target population A target population refers to all the members who meet the specific criteria for a specific research study (Alvi, 2016). The target population of this study consists of the entire workforce of Sparta Foods, which amounts to 792 employees. This is a heterogeneous population due to the common variables within the population that differ, namely gender, age, ethnicity, and socio-economic status (Bryman & Bell, 2007; Alvi, 2016). Due to the target population containing too many individuals to study conveniently, the research study will be restricted to a sample drawn from it. The relationship between the sample and the population must allow that true inferences can be made about the target population. The more the sample is representative of the entire population, the higher the accuracy of the inferences and the better generalisable the results will be (Alvi, 2016). 3.3.2 Research sample Bryman and Bell (2007) define a research sample as the segment of the population that is selected for investigation using either probability sampling or non-probability sampling methods. Probability sampling makes it possible to generalise findings from the sample to the population. Non-probability sampling is the opposite, as the odds of any member being selected within a sample cannot be calculated and relies on the subjective judgement of the researcher (Bryman & Bell, 2007). For this study, the sampling method used was probability sampling because this method ensures that every member of the population has a known probability of being included in the sample. This method of sampling reduces the chance of systematic errors, minimises 38 the chance of sampling biases, ensures that a better representative sample is produced, and that inferences drawn from the sample are generalisable to the target population. Because the population is heterogeneous, the probability sampling method used was stratified random sampling. With stratified random sampling, the target population is divided into sub-groups that have corresponding characteristics. These sub-groups are called strata. The topic and nature of a study determine on which criterion the strata will be based (Alvi, 2016; Bryman & Bell, 2007). Sparta Foods’ workforce can be divided into different departments and the strata were thus based on the departments within Sparta Foods. Using the proportional allocation technique, the number of individuals drawn from each stratum was based on the percentage each of these strata contributes to the total population, as shown in Table 3.1. The percentage contribution of each department was multiplied by the sample size to determine the representation of each stratum in the total sample. Table 3.1: Stratified random sampling table 3.4 DATA COLLECTION Data collection is the process of gathering and measuring information on variables of interest. The research questions and the nature of the variables being investigated usually drive the choice of measurement strategy for data collection (Marczyk, DeMatteo, & Festinger, 2005). The task of collecting data begins after the research Department Total population Stratum % of total population Sample size based on stratum % Department Total population Stratum % of total population Sample size based on stratum % Admin 33 4% 17 Offal 116 15% 59 Butchery 19 2% 10 Planning 5 1% 3 Canteen 9 1% 5 Property 9 1% 5 Clinic 1 0% 1 Refrigeration 5 1% 3 Cowheels 18 2% 9 Rendering plant 38 5% 19 Deboning 178 22% 90 Retail pack 53 7% 27 Engineering 31 4% 16 Sales 15 2% 8 Health & Safety 11 1% 6 Security 16 2% 8 Hides 12 2% 6 Slaughter floor 119 15% 60 Human Resources 12 2% 6 Stores 4 1% 2 IT 4 1% 2 Transport 15 2% 8 Laundry 5 1% 3 Warehouse 50 6% 25 Marketing 2 0% 1 Wholesale 12 2% 6 335 42% 169 457 58% 231 39 problem has been defined and the research design has been outlined. Two types of data can be collected, namely primary data and secondary data. Primary data are those that are original in character and are collected for the first time. Secondary data have already been collected by other researchers and have passed through a statistical process. The methods used to collect primary and secondary data differ due to primary data being originally collected and secondary data collection merely existing in a compilation (Kothari, 2004). Primary data were collected for this study. 3.4.1 Measuring instruments Several measuring instruments can be used to collect primary data. The choice of collection method depends on the purpose of the study and the resources available (Kumar, 2011). A questionnaire is a research instrument that consists of a set of questions intended to capture the responses from the respondents in a standardised manner. These questions can be unstructured or structured – unstructured asking respondents to provide a response in their own words and structured asking respondents to select an answer from a given set of choices. Questionnaires can consist of open-ended questions that allow the respondent to answer in his/her own words, and/or closed-ended questions that call for short check responses. Questionnaires can be used in a variety of survey situations, for example postal, electronic, face-to-face, and telephonic (Bryman & Bell, 2007; Kumar, 2011; Nayak & Singh, 2015). For this study, structured questionnaires were used as this measuring instrument is representative of a quantitative method of research, as well as a positivist research method. The questionnaires contained only closed-ended questions that were completed by the respondents of the study. Using closed-ended questions makes the answering process easier for the respondents and enhances the comparability of the answers, which makes it easier to identify the relationship between variables. The availability of answers may clarify the meaning of the questions should the respondent possibly not understand a question (Bryman & Bell, 2007). The structured questionnaire used for this study was the UWES. Schaufeli et al. (2002) developed this questionnaire to include the three founding aspects of work 40 engagement, namely vigour, dedication, and absorption. Respondents rate their levels of engagement on a six-point Likert scale (0 = Never to 5 = Always/Every day). Vigour was assessed by Questions 1, 4, 8, 12, 15, and 17, and refers to high levels of energy and resilience, the willingness of the employee to invest effort in his/her work, not being easily fatigued, and the persistence of the employee in the face of difficulties. Dedication was assessed by Questions 2, 5, 7, 10, and 13, and refers to the employee deriving a sense of significance from his/her work, feeling enthusiastic and proud about his/her job, and feeling inspired and challenged by the work he/she does. Absorption was measured by Questions 3, 6, 9, 11, 14, and 16, and refers to being totally and happily immersed in one’s work and having difficulties detaching oneself from it so that time passes quickly and one forgets everything else around (Schaufeli et al., 2002; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). 3.4.2 The data-collection process Data were collected using two methods of distribution. A portion of the questionnaires was web-based to accommodate employees who had access to the Internet, and the remainder of the questionnaires were hard copies that were distributed by the HODs of each department. The respondents who were willing to participate in the study provided informed consent by signing a consent form (see Annexure A). After signing the consent form, the respondents proceeded to complete a biographic questionnaire. After the biographic questionnaire was completed, the respondents completed the UWES questionnaire. 3.5 DATA ANALYSIS After the respondents completed their questionnaires, the researcher collated the quantitative data and captured the data on Microsoft Excel. The mean scale score of the three UWES subscales was calculated by adding the scores of the particular scale and dividing the sum by the number of items of the subscale involved. A similar procedure was followed for the total score. The UWES yields three subscale scores and/or a total score that range between 0 and 5 (Schaufeli et al., 2002). The findings that will be presented in Chapter 4 of this study were analysed to establish the relative frequencies as a percentage value. 41 The analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used