The relative roles of engagement and embeddedness in predicting job performance and intention to leave

Abstract Both work engagement and job embeddedness have seen dramatic growth in research interest over the past few years. Briefly, work engagement can be defined as a positive, fulfilling state of mind, most commonly characterized by vigour, dedication, and absorption. Job embeddedness, in contrast, captures components of an individual's attachment to their job and can be said to consist of links, perceptions of person–environment fit, and the sacrifices involved in quitting. Despite some strong similarity in the constructs in their theoretical bases, there has been no attempt to distinguish them empirically. Thus, the primary research question driving this study was whether work engagement and job embeddedness were empirically distinct constructs. Using a sample of US employees from a wide variety of industries and occupations (n=587), their supervisors, and their closest co-worker, we found via confirmatory factor analysis that engagement and embeddedness were unique constructs. Moreover, using usefulness analysis, we found that engagement and embeddedness each shared unique variance with in-role performance and intention to leave. We discuss the implications of these findings relative to work on motivation and attachment and develop practical implications from our findings as well as directions for future research.

[1]  P. Bentler,et al.  Comparative fit indexes in structural models. , 1990, Psychological bulletin.

[2]  A. Saks.  Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement , 2006 .

[3]  Christina Maslach,et al.  THE TRUTH ABOUT BURNOUT , 1997 .

[4]  R. Liden,et al.  Perceived Organizational Support And Leader-Member Exchange: A Social Exchange Perspective , 1997 .

[5]  D. Weiss,et al.  Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. , 1967 .

[6]  H. Akaike.  Factor analysis and AIC , 1987 .

[7]  P. Bentler,et al.  Significance Tests and Goodness of Fit in the Analysis of Covariance Structures , 1980 .

[8]  James K. Harter,et al.  Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: a meta-analysis. , 2002, The Journal of applied psychology.

[9]  A. Shirom.  Vigor ’ s Construct Validity 1 Feeling Vigorous at Work ? The Construct of Vigor and the Study of Positive Affect in Organizations , 2003 .

[10]  A. van den Broeck,et al.  Explaining the relationships between job characteristics, burnout, and engagement: The role of basic psychological need satisfaction , 2008 .

[11]  David G. Allen,et al.  DO ORGANIZATIONAL SOCIALIZATION TACTICS INFLUENCE NEWCOMER EMBEDDEDNESS AND TURNOVER , 2004 .

[12]  Douglas R. May,et al.  The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work , 2004 .

[13]  Wilmar B. Schaufeli,et al.  The Job Demands-Resources model: A three-year cross-lagged study of burnout, depression, commitment, and work engagement , 2008 .

[14]  Holly K. Osburn,et al.  Action Research as a Burnout Intervention , 2006 .

[15]  Paul J. Kobulnicky,et al.  Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research and application , 1998 .

[16]  V. Vroom.  Work and motivation , 1964 .

[17]  S. Hobfoll.  The Influence of Culture, Community, and the Nested-Self in the Stress Process: Advancing Conservation of Resources Theory , 2001 .

[18]  Guy Notelaers,et al.  Should I stay or should I go? Examining longitudinal relations among job resources and work engagement for stayers versus movers , 2008 .

[19]  R. Darlington,et al.  Multiple regression in psychological research and practice. , 1968, Psychological bulletin.

[20]  W. Schaufeli,et al.  Job burnout. , 2001, Annual review of psychology.

[21]  A. Bakker,et al.  Work engagement: An emerging concept in occupational health psychology , 2008, Bioscience trends.

[22]  A. Bakker,et al.  Flow at Work: Evidence for an Upward Spiral of Personal and Organizational Resources* , 2006 .

[23]  H. V. Emmerik,et al.  Social embeddedness and job performance of tenured and non-tenured professionals , 2004 .

[24]  Terence R. Mitchell,et al.  Increasing human and social capital by applying job embeddedness theory , 2006 .

[25]  M. Audrey Korsgaard,et al.  Procedural Justice in Performance Evaluation: The Role of Instrumental and Non-Instrumental Voice in Performance Appraisal Discussions , 1995 .

[26]  A. Bakker,et al.  Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi‐sample study , 2004 .

[27]  Wilmar B. Schaufeli,et al.  Burnout and work engagement: Independent factors or opposite poles? , 2006 .

[28]  R. Bennett,et al.  Development of a global measure of job embeddedness and integration into a traditional model of voluntary turnover. , 2007, The Journal of applied psychology.

[29]  Sebastiaan Rothmann,et al.  A PSYCHOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF THE UTRECHT WORK ENGAGEMENT SCALE IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICE , 2003 .

[30]  Marisa Salanova,et al.  Does a positive gain spiral of resources, efficacy beliefs and engagement exist? , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[31]  Stevan E. Hobfoll,et al.  Stress, Culture, and Community: The Psychology and Philosophy of Stress , 1998 .

[32]  R. Burke,et al.  Work engagement among women managers and professionals in a Turkish bank , 2006 .

[33]  K. Lewin.  Field theory in social science , 1951 .

[34]  Anthony R. Wheeler,et al.  When person‐organization (mis)fit and (dis)satisfaction lead to turnover , 2007 .

[35]  James C. Anderson,et al.  On the Meaning of Within-Factor Correlated Measurement Errors , 1984 .

[36]  William H. Mobley,et al.  Intermediate linkages in the relationship between job satisfaction and employee turnover. , 1977 .

[37]  A. Bakker,et al.  Dr Jekyll or Mr Hyde ? On the di ff erences between work engagement and workaholism , 2006 .

[38]  J. Peiró,et al.  Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: the mediation of service climate. , 2005, The Journal of applied psychology.

[39]  W. Schaufeli,et al.  Burnout interventions: An overview and illustration , 2009 .

[40]  A. Bakker,et al.  The Measurement of Engagement and Burnout: A Two Sample Confirmatory Factor Analytic Approach , 2002 .

[41]  Wilmar B. Schaufeli,et al.  “Same Same” But Different?: Can Work Engagement Be Discriminated from Job Involvement and Organizational Commitment? , 2006 .

[42]  P. Hom,et al.  The validity of Mobley's (1977) model of employee turnover. , 1984, Organizational behavior and human performance.

[43]  A. Bakker,et al.  Job Resources Boost Work Engagement, Particularly When Job Demands Are High , 2007 .

[44]  Jonathon R B Halbesleben,et al.  Emotional exhaustion and job performance: the mediating role of motivation. , 2007, The Journal of applied psychology.

[45]  K. Sanders,et al.  Differential Effects of Individual-Linked and Team-Level Status Allocation on Professionals’ Job Performance , 2002 .

[46]  Terence R. Mitchell,et al.  The Effects of Job Embeddedness on Organizational Citizenship, Job Performance, Volitional Absences, and Voluntary Turnover , 2004 .

[47]  Wilmar B Schaufeli,et al.  Take care! The evaluation of a team-based burnout intervention program for oncology care providers. , 2007, The Journal of applied psychology.

[48]  D. Campbell,et al.  Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. , 1959, Psychological bulletin.

[49]  Jonathon R. B. Halbesleben,et al.  A meta-analysis of work engagement: Relationships with burnout, demands, resources, and consequences. , 2010 .

[50]  Chris J. Sablynski,et al.  WHY PEOPLE STAY: USING JOB EMBEDDEDNESS TO PREDICT VOLUNTARY TURNOVER , 2001 .

[51]  L. J. Williams,et al.  Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment as Predictors of Organizational Citizenship and In-Role Behaviors , 1991 .

[52]  Richard T. Mowday,et al.  Reflections on the study and relevance of organizational commitment , 1998 .