Employee engagement and employee

satisfaction on projects
Project Management

Submitted to:
Sir Ahsen Maqsoom

by:

SALMAN SARWAR SP13-BBA-019

Submitted
BADAR KHALID SP13-BBA021
SADAM HUSSAIN SP13-BBA003
ALI BAIG SP13-BBA-005
NAVEED AHMED BUT SP13-BBA013
IMTIAZ KHAN FA12-BBA

Table of Contents
Introduction:............................................................................................................... 1
Drivers of Employee Engagement:.............................................................................2
Engaged:................................................................................................................. 2
Not Engaged:........................................................................................................... 2
Actively Disengaged:............................................................................................... 2
Employee satisfaction on projects:.............................................................................3
Motivation of employee towards projects:..................................................................5
Literature Review:....................................................................................................... 6
Employee engagement:........................................................................................... 10
Drivers of work engagement:................................................................................... 14
Drivers of Employee Engagement:...........................................................................18
Employee Engagement and Organizational Performance:........................................21
Findings:................................................................................................................... 29
Conclusion:............................................................................................................... 30

Introduction:
Employee engagement on projects: Employee engagement is the thus the level of commitment
and involvement an employee has towards their organization and its values. An engaged
employee is aware of business context, and works with colleagues to improve performance
within the job for the benefit of the organization or doing work on projects, it is a positive
attitude held by the employees towards the organization and its values. Engagement at work
(projects) was conceptualized by Kahn, (1990) as the harnessing of organizational members
selves to their work roles. In employee engagement, people employ and express themselves
physically, cognitively, and emotionally during role performances. Employee engagement he has
given important to all three aspects physically, cognitively and emotionally. Whereas in job
satisfaction importance has been more given to cognitive side. High levels of employee
engagement are when employees are involved with, committed to, enthusiastic, and passionate
about their work.
Perrins Global Workforce Study (2010) uses the definition of employee engagement as,
employees willingness and ability to help their company succeed, largely by providing
discretionary effort on a sustainable basis. According to the study, engagement is affected by
many factors which involve both emotional and rational factors relating to work and the overall
work experience.
Robinson et al (2009) define employee engagement as a positive attitude held by the employee
towards the projects and its value. An engaged employee is aware of business context, and works
with colleagues to improve performance within the projects for the benefit of the organization.
The organization must work to develop and nurture engagement, which requires a two-way
relationship between employer and employee to complete projects

Drivers of Employee Engagement:

Development Dimensions International (DDI, 2005) states that a manager must do five things to
create a highly engaged workforce for an any project. They are:
Align efforts with strategy
Empower
Promote and encourage teamwork and collaboration
Help people grow and develop
Provide support and recognition where appropriate
Basically Gallup divides the Employee Engagement in three forms.

Engaged:
"Engaged" employees are builders. They want to know the desired Expectations for their role so
they can meet and exceed them. They're naturally curious about their company and their projects.
They perform at consistently high levels. They want to use their talents and strengths at work
every day. They work with passion and they drive innovation and move their organization
forward.

Not Engaged:
Not-engaged employees tend to concentrate on tasks rather than the goals and outcomes they are
expected to accomplish. They want to be told what to do just so they can do it and say they have
finished. They focus on accomplishing tasks vs. achieving an outcome.

Actively Disengaged:
The "actively disengaged" employees are the "cave dwellers."

They're "Consistently against Virtually Everything. As workers increasingly rely on each other to
generate products and services, the problems and tensions that are fostered by actively
disengaged workers can cause great damage to an organization's functioning and lead to project
failure.

Managers unequivocally agree that this century demands more efficiency and
productivity than any other times in history. Managers have been grappling with many
challenges to succeed putting their company ahead of competitors. Among suggested
techniques, concepts like Total Quality Management (TQM) and Business Process
Reengineering (BPR) earned recognition from many authors in the second half of
twentieth century and were found helpful in increasing projects performance by focusing
on operational and process improvements. They were/still being used as tools for
management in their effort to plan, execute and control of the desired changes in the
operational quality.

Employee satisfaction on projects:

Employee satisfaction have beneficial impact on projects such as reduced turnover, low
absenteeism, and increased productivity and complete project on the time. Employee satisfaction
is one criterion for establishing the health of an organization;
Rendering effective services largely depends on the human source (Fitzgerald et al., 1994),
employee job satisfaction on projects and in organization experienced by employees will affect
the Quality of service they render. Employee satisfaction is an affective and cognitive attitudes
held by an employee about various aspects of their work. Implying that satisfaction on projects is
related to the component facets rather than the whole organization work, which is consistent with

Spectors (1997) view. Situational theories assume that the interaction of variables such as task
characteristics, organizational characteristics and individual characteristics influences employee
job satisfaction on projects. Employee satisfaction is the extent to which people like or dislike
their jobs which depends on the extent a persons work environment fulfills his or her
expectations, needs, values or personal characteristics.
Employee satisfaction positively influences work engagement: Empirical evidences demonstrate
a strong positive correlation between employee satisfaction and employee loyalty. Satisfied
employees are more likely to stay longer in an organization and to refer the organization as a
place of work to their acquaintances. On the other hand, low employee satisfaction could cause
employees to recede from their jobs, seek new jobs, or change their current jobs and careers
(Turkyilmaz et al., 2011). Moreover, employee satisfaction was found to be the antecedent of
organizational loyalty of employees. For instance, Jun et al. (2006) found that improved
employee satisfaction leads to a higher level of employees organizational loyalty which has
positive impact on organizational projects. Assumingly, short-term experiences of employee
satisfaction could create a stable attitude to employee loyalty in a long run.
Employee satisfaction and retention have always been important issues for organizations. The
term Employee Satisfaction refers to an individuals general attitude toward his or her job,
projects. Organizations that can create work environments that attract, motivate and retain hardworking individuals will be better positioned to succeed in a competitive environment that
demands quality and cost-efficiency. By creating a positive workplace for their employees, they
can increase their employees job satisfaction. Employee satisfaction can be characterized by job
involvement and organizational commitment. Job involvement measures the degree to which a
person identifies psychologically with his or her work and considers his or her perceived

performance level important to self- worth. He feels responsible towards the return to the
projects. He delivers his best and his performance level rises. He shows commitment towards
projects. He works with full honesty and loyalty. He reduces absenteeism to the minimum as the
work he does is of his interest and he willingly does it. The importance of employee satisfaction
and work motivation is growing all the time in the companies. Many researchers have been made
to find out the effect the employee satisfaction and motivation have in the productivity of the
companys projects.

Motivation of employee towards projects:

Increasing motivation, commitment and engagement levels are key projects aspects nowadays.
The progress of compensation policies has an important role in motivating workforce to
distribute high levels of performance, flexible effort and contribution. The procedure of
motivation usually starts with someone recognizing an unfulfilled need. Then a purpose is
established to be reached and that way to satisfy the need. Rewards and incentives can be
established for people to better accomplish the given goal. The social context will also affect the
motivation level. This context consists of projects values and culture but it also includes
leaderships and management as well as the influence of the group or team in which a person
works.
Motivation can be intrinsic or extrinsic. Essential motivation can be described as the process of
motivation by work itself in so far as it satisfies the personal needs of the employee.
Fundamental motivation is self-generated and it is attention that people seek for a task they think
will most satisfy their needs. The factors upsetting intrinsic motivation comprise for example
responsibility, autonomy to act, daring to use and widen persons own skills, fascinating tasks and
opportunities for improvement. Extrinsic enthusiasm is the amount of effort other people give to

the person to motivate them. Extrinsic motivation is for example the rewards management
provide such as pay rise, praise or promotion. Extrinsic motivators are efficient but the influence
doesnt last long.

Literature Review:
Framework of employee engagement model of Aon Hewitt:

The engagement model goes beyond measuring peoples satisfaction with each of these drivers.
The model prioritizes the area of improvement based on their potential impact on engagement
and therefore business performance. Another key promise of engagement model is that the
engagement drivers are interrelated; they do not operate in isolation. Now discuss below one by

one each driver of this model to show how employee engaged to his work and these are
following:
Work:

Work activities
Sense of accomplishment
Resources
Processes

People:

Senior leadership
Managers
Colleagues
Valuing people
Customers

Quality of life:

Physical work environment

Work life balance

Opportunities:

Career opportunities
Training and development

Total rewards:

Pay
Benefits
Recognition

Company practices:

Policy and practices

Performance management
Brand alignment
Company reputation

Diversity

We can say satisfaction is derived by engagement of employee to his work and also sometime he
is dissatisfied due to some reason now we analyze that what are the factors affect the employee
engagement lead toward employee satisfaction and employee dissatisfaction.

ENGAGEMENT

Factors leading to dissatisfaction:

Poor pay
Poor compensation
Poor work condition & environment
Lack of promotions
Poor benefits offering
Lack of job security

When these factors are optimal, job dissatisfaction will be eliminated. However, these factors do
not increase jab satisfaction.
Factors leading to satisfaction:

Good leadership practices

Good manager relationship
Recognition
Advancement
Personal growth
Feedback and support
Clear direction and objectives

When these factors are optimal, job satisfaction will be increased. So when manager assign work
to their employees they have to match work that give to them according to their personality and
work behavior.

Employee engagement:
Shuck and Wollard:
Employee engagement is an emergent working condition and a positive cognitive, emotional
and behavioral state directed toward project outcomes

Perrins Global work study:

Another definition describes employee engagement as the readiness of workers and their skills to
help their project be successful by being flexible in different situations
Shuck and Wollard:
Also define employee engagement as a growing working state in which the employees
perceptions, feelings and behaviors are aimed as the desired project results.
True engagement occurs when all employees in a project are passionate about the business
strategy and are committed to it its success. Employees have more than work satisfaction; they
are gratified to serve and are promoters of the products and brand name. There is evidence that
employee engagement increases productivity and overall performance, creates a better and more
productive work environment, reduces non-attendance and employees leaving. In a study in the
GCC countries it was discovered that when employees are engaged, they tend to produce more
and put in more effort to help their project. There are however challenges faced by employers to
determine what employee engagement is and what values create it as there are many theories that
are unclear concerning the subject.

Diagram:

Trust and integrity:

Employees believe that the leaders of the project are listening to them
Care and meet their needs:
Leaders are trustworthy and lead by example
Nature of the Job:
How involved and independent employees are
The link between employees and organizational performance:
Employees understand what is expected of them in terms of performance
Career growth opportunities:
Opportunities for employees to progress and get promoted
Pride about the company:
How the self-esteem of workers is increased by working for the project
Co-workers/Team members:
How they feel about their team, their work and the project
Employee development:
How much effort the project puts into developing their people
Peoples relationship with their leadership:
The value of the relationship between leaders and employees

Drivers of work engagement:

A positive relationship between work engagement and job resources has been consistently
reported. These authors work from the premise that job resources play either an intrinsic
motivational role because they foster employees growth, learning and development, or an
extrinsic motivational role because they are instrumental in achieving work goals. For the
intrinsic motivation role job, resources fulfill basic human needs, such as the needs for
autonomy, relatedness and competence. The extrinsic motivational role played by job resources

is through fostering the willingness to dedicate ones efforts and abilities to the work task.
Having a positive mind-set towards oneself predicts goal-setting, motivation, performance, job
and life satisfaction, career ambition and other desirable outcomes suggesting a positive
relationship between personal resources and work engagement.
Intrinsic Motivation:
Intrinsic motivation refers to the stimulation that drives an individual to adopt or change
behavior for his or her own internal satisfaction or fulfillment. Hunter (2004), who is known
mainly for her work in education, proposes a two-part system of motivation. In this model,
Hunter does not specify individual motivators such as money or status, but instead, identifies two
types of motivation namely; intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Extrinsic motivation, according to
Hunter, comprises five external factors that can be affected from the outside. These include: level
of concern, success, feedback and interest and feeling tone.
Job satisfaction:
Job satisfaction is defined as the extent to which people like or dislike their job. Thus, job
satisfaction implies an affective reaction towards a job. Hoppock (1935) defined job satisfaction
as an outcome of psychological, environmental and physical circumstances combined together.
The reasoning behind is that, if the expected outcomes are met, employees develop a positive
emotional attachment to the project. This involves employees appraisal of how well their jobs
provide things that are viewed as important usually influenced by an employees unique
experiences, needs, values and expectations. It is important to note that, job satisfaction is a
multifaceted construct that comprises both intrinsic and extrinsic job elements. Intrinsic elements
of job satisfaction arise from rewards that are mediated internally. Extrinsic elements arise from

rewards that are mediated externally. External rewards refer to aspects that have little to do with
work roles and internal rewards refer to work roles themselves. The former includes working
conditions and pay, and the latter refers to factors such as skill utilization and autonomy. Intrinsic
determinants of job satisfaction pertain to the nature of and activities inherent to a set of tasks
such as appreciation, feeling and intellectual stimulation (Herzberg, 1986). This is a subjective
variable which is not always quantifiable but is experienced when employees fulfill the needs
which they consider important in their work role.
Antecedents of Job satisfaction:
Personal determinants and project factors are two broad categories in which factors affecting job
satisfaction can be grouped. Personal determinants of job satisfaction include race, gender,
educational level, tenure, age and marital status (DeSantis & Durst, 1996). The relationship
between gender and job satisfaction has been extensively researched, yielding contradictory
results. In the Murray & Atkinson (1981) study it was found that females attach more importance
to social factors, while males place greater value on pay, advancement and other extrinsic
aspects.
Evolution of Employee Engagement:
Most references relate employee engagement to survey houses and consultancies. It is less taken
as an academic construct. The concept is relatively new for HRM and appeared in the literatures
for nearly two decades (Rafferty, Maben, West and Robinson, 2005; Meldrum Publishing, 2005;
Ellis and Sorensen, 2007). The construct, employee engagement emanates from two concepts
that have won academic recognition and have been the subjects of empirical researchCommitment and Organizational Citizen Behavior (OCB) (Robinson, Perryman and Heyday.

Employee engagement has similarities to and overlaps with the above two concepts. Robinson et
al. (2004) state that neither commitment nor OCB reflect sufficiently two aspects of engagementits two-way nature, and the extent to which engaged employees are expected to have an element
of business awareness, even though it appears that engagement overlaps with the two concepts.
Rafferty et al (2005) also distinguish employee engagement and the two prior conceptsCommitment and OCB, on the ground that engagement clearly demonstrates that it is a two-way
mutual process between the employee and the organization. To date, there is no single and
generally accepted definition for the term employee engagement. This is evident if
one looks at the definitions forwarded for the term by three well-known research organizations in
human resource area, let alone individual researchers. Below are the definitions:
Perrins Global Workforce Study (2003) uses the definition employees willingness and ability
to help their company succeed, largely by providing discretionary effort on a sustainable basis.
According to the study, engagement is affected by many factors which involve both emotional
and rational factors relating to work and the overall work experience. Gallup organization
defines employee engagement as the involvement with and enthusiasm for work. Gallup as cited
by Dernovsek likens employee engagement to a positive employees emotional attachment and
employees commitment. Define employee engagement as a positive attitude held by the
employee towards the organization and its value. An engaged employee is aware of business
context, and works with colleagues to improve performance within the job for the benefit of the
organization. The organization must work to develop and nurture engagement, which requires a
two-way relationship between employer and employee. This verdict and definition forwarded
by Institute of Employment Studies gives a clear insight that employee engagement is the result
of two-way relationship between employer and employee pointing out that there are things to be

done by both sides. Furthermore, Fernandez shows the distinction between job satisfaction, the
well-known construct in management, and engagement contending that employee satisfaction is
not the same as employee engagement and since managers cannot rely on employee satisfaction
to help retain the best and the brightest, employee engagement becomes a critical concept. Other
researchers take job satisfaction as a part of engagement, but it can merely reflect a superficial,
transactional relationship that is only as good as the organizations last round of perks and
bonuses; Engagement is about passion and commitment-the willingness to invest oneself and
expand ones discretionary effort to help the employer succeed, which is beyond simple
satisfaction with the employment arrangement or basic loyalty to the employer Therefore, the
full engagement equation is obtained by aligning maximum job satisfaction and maximum job
contribution. Stephen Young, the executive director of Towers Perrin, also distinguishes between
job satisfaction and engagement contending that only engagement (not satisfaction) is the
strongest predictor of organizational performance Recent researches also indicate that Employee
commitment and OCB are important parts and predictors of employee engagement in that
commitment is conceptualized as positive attachment and willingness to exert energy for success
of the organization, feeling proud of being a member of that organization and identifying oneself
with it and OCB is a behavior observed within the work context that demonstrates itself through
taking innovative initiatives proactively seeking opportunities to contribute ones best and going
extra mile beyond employment contract. However, these constructs constitute the bigger
construct employee engagement and they cannot independently act as a replacement for
engagement The bad news for management is that global surveys conducted by survey houses
and research organizations indicate that significant size of employees are disengaged being
skeptical of any organizational initiative or communication and rather more likely indulging in

contagious negativity Ellis and Sorensen, Blessing White,. The problem with these surveys is
that they use their own items to measure employee engagement. If looked at the available
literatures on measuring employee engagement, one would get surprisingly several measurement
items to the extent that it seems different constructs are being measured Future researches are
expected to come up with clear definition and dimensions of employee engagement on basis of
which the level of engagement can be measured thereby pointing out to managers the roadmap
for fully engaging employees in their job. As the old saying goes what you cant measure, you
cant manage. Thus, there is a call for future researches, as suggested by Enders and ManchenoSmoak to define engagement in clear terms to avoid interpretation by subsequent users giving to
the construct different meanings

Drivers of Employee Engagement:

Many researches have tried to identify factors leading to employee engagement and developed
models to draw implications for managers. Their diagnosis aims to determine the drivers that will
increase employee engagement level. According to Pena research report meaning at work has the
potential to be valuable way of bringing employers and employees closer together to the benefit
of both where employees experience a sense of community, the space to be themselves and the
opportunity to make a contribution, they find meaning. Employees want to work in the
organizations in which they find meaning at work. Pena researchers have also come up with a
new model they called Hierarchy of engagement which resembles Maslows need hierarchy
model. In the bottom line there are basic needs of pay and benefits. Once an employee satisfied
these needs, then the employee looks to development opportunities, the possibility for promotion
and then leadership style will be introduced to the mix in the model. Finally, when all the above

cited lower level aspirations have been satisfied the employee looks to an alignment of valuemeaning, which is displayed by a true sense of connection, a common purpose and a shared
sense of meaning at work. The Blessing White study has found that almost two thirds (60%) of
the surveyed employees want more opportunities to grow forward to remain satisfied in their
jobs. Strong manager-employee relationship is a crucial ingredient in the employee engagement
and retention formula. Development Dimensions International states that a manager must do five
things to create a highly engaged workforce. They are:
Align efforts with strategy
Empower
Promote and encourage teamwork and collaboration
Help people grow and develop
Provide support and recognition where appropriate

The Towers Perrin Talent Report identifies the top ten work place attributes which will result in
employee engagement. The top three among the ten drivers listed by Perrin are: Senior
managements interest in employees well-being, Challenging work and Decision making
authority. After surveying 10,000 NHS employees in Great Britain, Institute of Employment
Studies points out that the key driver of employee engagement is a sense of feeling valued and
involved, which has the components such as involvement in decision making, the extent to which
employees feel able to voice their ideas, the opportunities employees have to develop their jobs
and the extent to which the organization is concerned for employees health and well-being.
CIPD on the basis of its survey of employees from across Great Britain indicates that
communication is the top priority to lead employees to engagement. The report singles out
having the opportunity to feed their views and opinions upwards as the most important driver of
peoples engagement. The report also identifies the importance of being kept informed about

what is going on in the organization. The oldest consulting organization in conducting

engagement survey, Gallup has found that the manager is the key to an engaged work force.
James Clifton, CEO of Gallup organization indicates that employees who have close friendships
at work are more engaged workers. Vance explains the fact that employee engagement is
inextricably linked with employer practices. To shed light on the ways in which employer
practices affect job performance and engagement, he presents a job performance model.
According to him, Employee engagement is the outcome of personal attributes such as
knowledge, skills, abilities, temperament, attitudes and personality, organizational context which
includes leadership, physical setting and social setting and HR practices that directly affect the
person, process and context components of job performance. Most drivers that are found to lead
to employee engagement are non-financial in their nature. Therefore, any organization who has
committed leadership can achieve the desired level of engagement with less cost of doing
it. This does not mean that managers should ignore the financial aspect of their employees. In
fact, performance should be linked with reward. Nevertheless, this is simply to repeat the old
saying of Human Relations Movement which goes as social being, human resource is not
motivated by money alone. As Buckingham and Coffman said, pay and benefits are equally
important to every employee, good or bad. A companys pay should at least be comparable to the
market average. However, bringing pay and benefits package up to market levels, which is a
sensible first step, will not take a company very far- they are like tickets to the ballpark, -they
can get the company into the game, but cant help it win.

Employee

Engagement

Performance:

and

Organizational

Why should companies invest in employee engagement? The answer is because employee
engagement is interwoven significantly with important business outcomes. In this part we will
see how employee engagement impacts organizational performance in the light of various
research works done. Studies have found positive relationship between employee engagement
and organizational performance outcomes: employee retention, productivity, profitability,
customer loyalty and safety. Researches also indicate that the more engaged employees are, the
more likely their employer is to exceed the industry average in its revenue growth. Employee
engagement is found to be higher in double-digit growth companies. Research also indicates that
engagement is positively related to customer satisfaction Engaged employee consistently
demonstrates three general behaviours which improve organizational performance:
Say-the employee advocates for the organization to co-workers, and refers potential employees
and customers Stay-the employee has an intense desire to be a member of the organization
despite opportunities to work elsewhere
Strive-the employee exerts extra time, effort and initiative to contribute to the success of the
business
What will happen to an organization if its employees are disengaged? Employees who are not
engaged are likely to be spinning (wasting their effort and talent on tasks that may not matter
much), settling (certainly do not show full commitment, not dissatisfied enough to make a break)
and splitting (they are not sticking around for things to change in their organization), have far
more misgivings about their organization in terms of performance measures such as customer
satisfaction based on the survey conducted by ISR on 360000 employees from 41 companies in
the worlds 10 economically strong countries finds that both operating margin and net profit
margins reduced over a three year period in companies with low engagement, while these

measures increased over the specified period in companies with high levels of engagement.
Financial News , as cited by Accord Management Systems reveals that disengaged employees
are more likely to cost their organization. According to the report, Employees who are
disengaged:
Miss an average of 3.5 more days per year
Are less productive
Cost the US economy $292 to $355 billion per year
Employee Engagement Strategies
So far we have discussed the evolution and definition of employee engagement, the factors that
affect it and importance of employee engagement explaining how it is linked to business
performance. Now, at this stage any inquisitive reader may ask a question: So what? Employee
engagement strategies listed below answer this question. In order to have engaged employees in
any organization, managers need to look at the following ten points. We can call these points
tablets because it is believed that they will cure employee disengagement diseases. Take these
ten tablets:
1. Start it on day one: Most organizations do have clear new talent acquisition strategies.
However, they lack employee retention strategies. Effective recruitment and orientation
programs are the first building blocks to be laid on the first day of the new employee. Managers
should be careful in pooling out the potential talent of the new employee through effective
recruitment. The newly hired employee should be given both general orientation which is related
to the company mission, vision, values, policies and procedures and job-specific orientation such
as his/her job duties, and responsibilities, goals and current priorities of the department to which
the employee belongs in order to enable him/her to develop realistic job expectations and reduce

role conflict that might arise in the future. After the hiring decision is made, the manager has to
ensure role-talent fit when placing an employee in a certain position and exert all managerial
efforts needed to retain that talent in the organization.
2. Start it from the top: Employee engagement requires leadership commitment through
establishing clear mission, vision and values. Unless the people at the top believe in it, own it,
pass it down to managers and employees, and enhance their leadership, employee engagement
will never be more than just a corporate fad or another HR thing. Employee engagement
does not need lip-service rather dedicated heart and action-oriented service from top
management. It requires Leading by Being example
3. Enhance employee engagement through two-way communication: Managers should
promote two-way communication. Employees are not sets of pots to which you pour out your
ideas without giving them a chance to have a say on issues that matter to their job and life. Clear
and consistent communication of what is expected of them paves the way for engaged
workforce. Involve your people and always show respect to their input. Share power with your
employees through participative decision making so that they would feel sense of belongingness
thereby increasing their engagement in realizing it.
4. Give satisfactory opportunities for development and advancement: Encourage
independent thinking through giving them more job autonomy so that employees will have a
chance to make their own freedom of choosing their own best way of doing their job so long as
they are producing the expected result. Manage through results rather than trying to manage all
the processes by which that result is achieved.
5. Ensure that employees have every thing they need to do their jobs: Managers are expected
to make sure that employees have all the resources such as physical or material, financial and

information resources in order to effectively do their job.

6. Give employees appropriate training: Help employees update themselves increasing their
knowledge and skills through giving appropriate trainings. Generally it is understood that when
employees get to know more about their job, their confidence increases there by being able to
work without much supervision from their immediate managers which in turn builds their selfefficacy and commitment.
7. Have strong feedback system: Companies should develop a performance management
system which holds managers and employees accountable for the level of engagement they have
shown. Conducting regular survey of employee engagement level helps make out factors that
make employees engaged. After finalizing the survey, it is advisable to determine all the factors
that driving engagement in the organization, then narrow down the list of factors to focus on two
or three areas. It is important that organizations begin with a concentration on the factors that
will make the most difference to the employees and put energy around improving these areas as
it may be difficult to address all factors at once. Managers should be behind such survey results
and develop action-oriented plans that are specific, measurable, and accountable and timebound.
8. Incentives have a part to play: Managers should work out both financial and non-financial
benefits for employees who show more engagement in their jobs. Several management theories
have indicated that when employees get more pay, recognition and praise, they tend to exert
more effort into their job. There should be a clear link between performance and incentives given
to the employees.
9. Build a distinctive corporate culture: Companies 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 will not only keep their existing
employees engaged but also they baptize the new incoming employees with this contagious spirit
of work culture.
10. Focus on top-performing employees: A study conducted by Watson Wyatt Worldwide in
2004/05 on HR practices of 50 large USA firms shows that high-performing organizations are
focusing on engaging their top-performing employees. According to the finding of the same
research, what high-performing firms are doing is what top-performing employees are asking for
and this reduces the turnover of high-performing employees and as a result leads to top business
performance. It is worth considering how employee engagement levels vary across occupations,
industries and globally. Much of the available international evidence comes from Gallup, which
has conducted Employee Engagement Index surveys in many countries. We would argue that
cross-national comparisons of levels of employee engagement should be treated with some
caution due to cultural and definitional differences. However, it is interesting to explore some of
the findings of Gallups surveys. In 2005, a survey conducted in Thailand revealed only 12 per
cent of Thailands employee population are engaged, 82 per cent are actively disengaged and
6 per cent disengaged. Similar Gallup studies have found the levels of engagement in Australia,
China, Japan, New 8 Zealand and Singapore to be 18 per cent, 12 per cent, 9 per cent, 17 per
cent and 9 per cent respectively. The study of employee engagement at a global level is
worthwhile given the increasing number of multi-national organizations and use of outsourcing.
It is important to consider whether or not the same engagement techniques work for employees
in countries with different economies and cultures. In 2004, International Survey Research (ISR),
the international research consultancy, completed a major survey into the nature and causes of
employee engagement and how companies can improve engagement to enhance business

performance. The survey was conducted across ten of the worlds largest economies - Australia,
Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Hong Kong, the Netherlands, Singapore, the UK and the USA,
involving nearly 160,000 employees from across a broad spectrum of industries. The survey
highlights large variations among the 10 countries in terms of employees overall commitment
to, and involvement with their employers. For example, in Brazil and in the US, 75 per cent of
employees were found to be engaged with their companies, whilst only 59 percent of French
employees were engaged. The research demonstrates that one size does not fit all when it comes
to motivating employees to engage with their company and work. For example, in Australia,
Singapore, and Hong Kong, the extent to which company management is respected emerged as
an influential determinant of engagement. In the UK and US, on the other hand, a more
important factor was the degree to which organizations provide long-term employment and
career opportunities. Evidence from the USA indicates roughly half of all Americans in the
workforce are not fully engaged or they are disengaged. Furthermore, a Global Workforce
Survey conducted in 2005 by consultancy firm Towers Perrin found disconcerting findings, again
in the USA. The survey involved about 85,000 people who worked full-time for large and midsized firms; it found only 14 per cent of all employees worldwide were highly engaged in their
job. The survey also indicated that on a country-by country basis, the percentages of highly
engaged, moderately engaged, and actively disengaged employees varied considerably.
Moreover, the results showed some interesting, perhaps counter-intuitive, findings. For example,
Mexico and Brazil have the highest percentages of engaged employees, while Japan and Italy
have the largest percentages of disengaged employees. It is argued that global research will help
employers gauge their employees level of engagement against the norm for their own country.
Previous research has shown that organizations must adapt to different cultural values and norms

when it comes to attracting, motivating and retaining staff. ISRs study identified four issues as
global factors in managing engagement; career development, leadership, empowerment, and
image (which refers to the companys image to customers and the public). Career development
was found to influence engagement for employees in each of the ten countries studied, with the
key message being organizations with high levels of engagement provide employees with
opportunities to develop their abilities, learn new skills, acquire new knowledge and realize their
potential. The logic behind this is that when companies invest in their people in this way, their
people invest in them. The research also identified the need for empowerment; employees want
to be involved in decisions that affect their work. It was found that leaders of high-engagement
workplaces do not create fear or blame cultures, where employees are reluctant to express their
ideas or exercise their initiative. Instead, they create a trusting and challenging environment, in
which employees are encouraged to input and innovate to move the organization forward. A
useful comparison between a range of demographic segments, from job level (senior executive,
director/manager, supervisor/foreman, specialist/professional, non-management salaried and
non-management hourly) to industry category (non-profit, high tech, heavy manufacturing,
insurance, pharmaceuticals, hospital and finance/banking) was carried out by researchers at
Towers Perrin, who found a pattern across the segments. Each group had only a small group of
highly engaged respondents, a slightly larger disengaged group, with the majority in the
moderately engaged group. However, in each case there was one exception to the pattern that is
worth noting; senior executives were found to be more highly engaged than any other group and
were less likely to be disengaged. Cynics might suggest this may be linked to income level and,
while this certainly emerged as important in this study, it was not the only contributory factor.
More important were role characteristics, such as challenge, authority, autonomy, stimulation,

access to information, resources and growth opportunities, that research has shown are linked to
high levels of engagement. The lowest levels of engagement have been found among hourly
workers, who arguably have the least control or influence over their jobs and work experience.
Across industries, engagement is substantially higher in the non-profit sector than in every other
sector looked at by Towers Perrin. This would appear logical, given that people tend to be drawn
to this sector through a sense of mission, rather than from any prospect of high pay or wealth
accumulation. This finding is also consistent with the numerous definitions and views
surrounding engagement, which identifies a passion for work as being a key component factor
Brim and Holbeche and Springiest. Indeed, the fact that the sector is traditionally not a highpaying one, relative to the others studied, emphasizes the fact that it is not possible to buy
engagement in the conventional sense by offering better than average monetary awards.
Conversely, in another study comparing the public and private sectors, found that group in the
public sector had a more negative experience of work, they reported more bullying and
harassment than those in the private sector, and were less satisfied with the opportunities they
had to use their abilities. This reinforces the findings of previous studies and underlines the scale
of the challenge facing public sector managers in particular, and the negative impact that
bullying and harassment have on employees and their levels of engagement.

Findings:
Findings of various researches suggest their own strategies in order to keep employees engaged.
Here in this article ten points or strategies called the ten tablets were suggested to keep
employees engaged. For managers, work of employee engagement starts at day one through
effective recruitment and orientation program, the work of employee engagement begins from
the top as it is unthinkable to have engaged people in the organizations where there are no

engaged leadership. Managers should enhance two-way communication, ensure that employees
have all the resources they need to do their job, give appropriate training to increase their
knowledge and skill, establish reward mechanisms in which good job is rewarded through
various financial and non-financial incentives, build a distinctive corporate culture that
encourages hard work and keeps success stories alive, develop a strong performance
management system which holds managers and employees accountable for the behaviour they
bring to the workplace, place focus on top-performing employees to reduce their turnover and
maintain or increase business performance.

Conclusion:
To date, there is no generally accepted definition for employee engagement. However, there is
growing consensus among the authors that the construct is distinguishable from related concepts
in management such as employee commitment, organizational citizenship behaviour and job
satisfaction in such a manner that employee engagement clearly reflects the two-way exchange
of effort between employees and employers, and it has stretched meaning beyond the
aforementioned constructs. Research on engagement is still on its infancy, attempting to come up
with more clear-cut and acceptable definition. Most studies demonstrate that feeling valued by
management, two-way communication between management and employees, managements
interest in employees well-being and giving more opportunities for employees to grow are the
top drivers of employee engagement. Nevertheless, as studies indicate, employees do not give
much importance to pay and benefits. This might be the case because almost all the surveys were
made in companies working in economically-well-to-do countries. The priorities of drivers might
have varied if similar surveys were undergone in other third world countries, like African
countries. Therefore, there is a need for more global surveys including more number of countries.
The literatures indicate that employee engagement is closely linked with organizational
performance outcomes. Companies with engaged employees have higher employee retention as a
result of reduced turnover and reduced intention to leave the company, productivity, profitability,
growth and customer satisfaction. On the other hand, companies with disengaged employees
suffer from waste of effort and bleed talent, earn less commitment from the employees, face
increased absenteeism and have less customer orientation, less productivity, and reduced
operating margins and net profit margins. Most researches emphasize merely the importance and
positive impacts of employee engagement on the business outcomes, failing to provide the costbenefit analysis for engagement decisions. As any other management decisions, engagement

decision should be evaluated in terms of both its benefits and its associated costs, without giving
greater emphasis to neither of the two, not to bias the decision makers. Thus there is a need to
study the cost aspect of engagement decisions. The remarkable fact is, the findings of todays
researches, can be used as corner stone for the building of complete essence to the construct.
Furthermore, much of the works related to employee engagement construct is attributed to
survey houses and consultancies. Therefore, there is a need for academia to investigate this new
construct and come up with a clear definition and dimensions that will be used for measuring
employee engagement justifying the importance of engagement concept. Otherwise, it will pass
away shortly as many other human resource fads did.