Employee Engagement For Human Resource Department

Background

Discuss about the Employee Engagement for Human Resource Department.

The phrase ‘Employee Engagement’ has attained fame in the recent years. Advocated optimistic results of Employee Engagement make associations build up the culture or atmosphere of engagement at the workplace on the highest priority for the Enterprise. The relationship between the organization and its workers is the main property of the Employee engagement. Engaged Employee is characterized as the individual who is completely absorbed as well as enthusiastic regarding their work thus makes positive moves to advance the association’s interests and reputation. This study includes the variables added to Employee Engagement and how the Human Resources play a vital part in upgrading Employee Engagement are also discussed in this paper.

In the recent past ‘Employee Engagement’ seemed as a typical expression in the Human Resource department. In the year 1990, Kahn had set up a theoretical model to understand why and when people invest varying levels of themselves in the job profile’s performance. He explored situations at a workplace where individuals had personally expressed as well as engaged their personal selves. The level of inclusion and commitment, a worker has towards the organization and also to its values is known as Employee Engagement. The Engaged workers know about the business settings, work with associates to enhance performance in the business for the wellbieng of the organization and has an inspirational mentality held by employees towards the enterprise values (Cervai, Kekale and Claxton, 2014).

Employee engagement is the most vital performance and association management theme. There are various positive results from building the employee engagement and both organizations and employees take benefits from the Employee engagement. Almost every organization expresses that there is an association between the employee engagement and profitability of organizations because there is an increment in organization’s benefits through higher profitability, expanded deals, consumer loyalty and employee maintenance (Berens, 2013). On the other hand, some negative aspects of Employee Engagement are also there. Dramatic changes in the economy of the entire world in the last Twenty-five years has had a huge implication for reciprocity and commitment amongst the employers and their workers and these changes also effect Employee Engagement adversely. There are a few strategies which are not to be talked about by the organization to its employees. A few things are there to be kept unrevealed as it is not fair to engage the employee in the important discussions (Cook, 2008).

Arguments for as Well as Against

Employee Engagement Relate to Job Satisfaction and Motivation

Job Satisfaction: Employee or Job satisfaction is, basically, how content or fulfilled representatives are with their employments. Job satisfaction is ordinarily measured by utilizing an employee satisfaction review in the organization.

Motivations: Keeping workers engaged and motivated is the way to achieve the organization’s prosperity. Sadly, there is no precise way to motivate the workers since diverse individuals are motivated by diverse things at diverse times. There are numerous variables influencing motivation that chiefs have practically no control over it (Ganesh, 2016).

Workers acquire a fundamental part of every organization; the enthusiasm of representatives will help to accomplish the organization’s goals. Effective Employee Engagement system makes a group in the workplace rather than just a workforce. At the point when the workers are viable and emphatically engaged with their association, they frame an enthusiastic association with the organization. This impacts their ‘state of mind’     towards both their partners and the organization’s customer and enhances consumer loyalty and administration levels (Garber, 2007). Factors which might be added to decrease the levels of employee engagement in the present workplace will include some demographic and workplace factors.

Demographic Factors: Employee Engagement Surveys have made it significant among the organizations and the effect of Demographic Variables on the Employee Engagement is the main component on which the organizations focuses the most (Messarra, 2014). Success today needs a better and good attendance of employees. Employees play a significant role within every organization. The employee’s interest will help organizations to achieve their objectives. The employees trust in the purpose, values, and mission of the organization and show their commitment via their activities as a worker and attitudes towards their employer as well as their customer. (Haski-Leventhal, 2012).

Working environment factors: Great working environment makes a vision and regular team objectives to keep up the motivation or inspiration of their representatives over a very long time period. The administration team must show achievement and development of the association. The present achievement of the organization and the conviction or trust on the employees where the business will go later on is vital to a representative’s inspiration at the workplace (Kumar and Swetha, 2011). Therefore, there are lots of factors which contribute to reducing the level of the Employee Engagement in the workplace.

A case of an organization that used the instrument created by the Gallup is B and Q, the UK based, home change organization is discussed here. In 2000, the organization has been measuring the Employee Engagement utilizing the Q12 overview. In 1998, around 3500 workers from Forty-three B &Q stores took an interest in the nine-month experimental run program. The tool comprises of 12 inquiries and the answerer was requested that demonstrate to what degree they concur or differ to every inquiry. High scores overview shows the high state of employee engagement (McBain, 2007).

Applicability of the Approach

Human Resource supports the Employee Engagement: With a specific end goal to, achieve competitive advantages associations are referring to Human Resource divisions to set the plan for making the way or culture of engagement in the workplace. The HR divisions manage the workforce and their relationships. Its responsibilities frequently include standard managerial undertakings and helping different chiefs by managing representatives beginning of the determination procedure up to the end of the agreement (Mr.K.ArunKumar, 2013). The Human Resource division is responsible for staffing, choice, introduction, preparing and advancement, execution evaluation and wellbeing issues.

Hewitt’s Engagement Framework: Aon Hewitt’s representative engagement research represents an assortment of organizations, ventures, along with geographic regions  through the nations in Asia-Pacific, North America, Europe, and Latin America. Understanding and checking how connected or engaged organization’s individuals has no value until organization does not recognize what activities will be best in expanding their Employee engagement (Sonenshein and Dholakia, 2012).

Saks’s multidimensional theory: Another way to deal with representative engagement emerged out of the multidimensional point of view of the Employee Engagement introduced by Saks in 2006. Saks characterized Employee Engagement as a particular and unique kind of constructing and comprising of psychological, enthusiastic, and behavioral segments that are connected with people role performance.

Strategic function: Vital Human Resource incorporates Human Resource arrangements and approaches with the association’s vital plans, providing the possibility to make the representatives’ work more significantly and identified with the vital strategic direction of the association (Neault and Pickerell, 2011).

Selection and Recruitment: The enrollment procedure tries to guarantee that the organization has right individuals set in the right employments. This is imperative for the further worker or employee engagement, this is because if the representatives are tuned into their occupations, then all of them are mentally present during their works or task execution, they don’t withdraw and block from the employment.

Development and Training: Learning, preparing and advancement have two implications for the workers. It might be seen as an inherent motivator, as they assist workers’ development, learning, and improvement. It can likewise be an outward motivator since they provide more instruments to representatives so that they can utilize them during their work or tasks for accomplishing their objectives (Plester and Hutchison, 2016).

Employee engagement models and theory

Kahn’s require satisfying approach: Initially, Employee Engagement was noticed by Khan in 1990 in his article, Kahn characterized individual engagement as “the concurrent business and articulation of an individuals “favored self” in the tasks, practices which elevate the associations work.

Impact of the Concepts

Maslach’s burnout-antithesis approach: Kahn’s examination was the main distributed writing on the engagement until the year 2001, when Schaufeli, Leiter and Maslach in 2001 started their study with work burnout idea. In their study, they positioned the Procedure of Employee Engagement like a “positive antithesis” to burnout (Vestal, 2012).

Harter’s satisfaction-engagement Theory: In 2002, another approach by Harter exhibited a standout amongst the most broadly read and referred works on representative engagement, where they utilized 7939 specialty units to look at the advantages of engagement. Worker engagement was characterized here like an “individual’s association and satisfaction and additionally enthusiasm for the work (Vitt, 2014).

Conclusion

It has been concluded in this study that the Employee Engagement nowadays has become a top priority for every organization. Developing an optimistic Employee Engagement framework to offer organizations, a sustainable competitive advantage. This study also concludes that the absence of the Employee Engagement model doesn’t let the organization to achieve its goals. There is a need to enhance the factors and levels of Employee Engagement and results of this study shows that administrative employees in the organization are usually not engaged.

References

Berens, R. (2013). The Roots of Employee Engagement-A Strategic Approach. Empl. Rel. Today, 40(3), pp.43-49.

Cervai, S., Kekäle, T. and Claxton, J. (2014). Employee Engagement. Bradford: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Cook, S. (2008). The essential guide to employee engagement. London: Kogan Page.

Ganesh, A. (2016). Employee Engagement-A Means to Employee Involvement. IIMS Jrnl. Mgmt. Sci., 7(2), p.165.

Garber, P. (2007). 50 activities for employee engagement. Amherst, Mass.: HRD Press.

Haski-Leventhal, D. (2012). Employee Engagement in CSR: The Case of Payroll Giving in Australia. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Mgmt., 20(2), pp.113-128.

Kumar, D. and Swetha, G. (2011). A Prognostic Examination of Employee Engagement from its Historical Roots. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, pp.232-241.

McBain, R. (2007). The practice of engagement: Research into current employee engagement practice. Strategic HR Review, 6(6), pp.16-19.

Messarra, L. (2014). Religious Diversity at Work: The Perceptual Effects of Religious Discrimination on Employee Engagement and Commitment. Contemporary Management Research, 10(1), pp.59-80.

Mr.K.ArunKumar, M. (2013). Antecedents and Consequences of Employee Engagement- A Hypothetical Approach. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), pp.52-57.

Neault, R. and Pickerell, D. (2011). Career engagement: bridging career counseling and employee engagement. Journal of Employment Counseling, 48(4), pp.185-188.

Plester, B. and Hutchison, A. (2016). Fun times: the relationship between fun and workplace engagement. Employee Relations, 38(3), pp.332-350.

Sonenshein, S. and Dholakia, U. (2012). Explaining Employee Engagement with Strategic Change Implementation: A Meaning-Making Approach. Organization Science, 23(1), pp.1-23.

Vestal, K. (2012). Which Matters: Employee Satisfaction or Employee Engagement?. Nurse Leader, 10(6), pp.10-11.

Vitt, L. (2014). Raising Employee Engagement Through Workplace Financial Education. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2014(141), pp.67-77.