Effect of Employee Engagement on Change Management - Literature review Example

EFFECT OF EMLPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT ON CHANGE MANAGEMENT By Human Resources The of the School The and State where it is located The Date EFFECT OF EMLPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT ON CHANGE MANAGEMENT The literature review should look at all the major theories regarding this topic and try to compare and contrast some of the different theories and studies in the literature. Introduction Employee engagement characterizes the relationship of the workforce with their employers in a work setting. Recently, it has become a debatable topic, especially in the need of companies to gain a competitive advantage and increase in company productivity. Even so, employee engagement provides both benefits and considerable confusion pertaining to its implementation. As a result, engagement has diverse definitions and variations in different organizational settings. In contrast, change management involves the evolution of a workforce and an organization to a preferred future state that is beneficial and productive. Through proper management, change is implemented in a systematic manner that has on-going benefits. Employee management has a considerable effect on change management. In this literature review, several peer-review articles will be scrutinized to try to establish the forms of employee engagement and their applicability in change management. The review indicates that employee engagement is not as prevalent in organizations as required. In addition, several organizations see it as a means of intensifying their productivity through creation of a happier and more involved workforce. The review explores the research studies conducted pertaining to employee engagement and change management, and unravels the gaps that have not been addressed. In the main, this review presents a reflective stance on the existing information and findings based on models such as job demands-resource model and the social exchange theory. The review will be governed by three significant questions: 1. What is the implication of employee management? 2. What is the relationship of employee engagement and employee involvement? 3. What is the effect of employee engagement on change management? The world is altering in terms of the diversity of employees and work varieties. Employee engagement is an important consideration in terms of realizing a competitive advantage. According to Kumar and Swetha (2011), employee engagement is a considerable ingredient for success of any business. In their article “A Prognostic Examination of Employee Engagement from its Historical Roots a Prognostic Examination of Employee Engagement from its Historical Roots” it is affirmed that employee engagement aids in the retention of talent in a business, promotes customer allegiance, and boosts managerial performance. More to that, it is austerely predisposed by leadership style, organizational culture, and trust within the organization. This point is consistently agreed upon by Markos, and Sridevi in their journal “Employee Engagement: The Key to Improving Performance” (2010). Employees are likely not to engage themselves in case of mismanagement and untrustworthy leadership methods. In most cases, engagement hinges on job satisfaction and proper interpersonal relationships with the managerial team. Through proper employee engagement, it is easy to implement change in an organization because the workforce will believe the change serves both their interests and that of the organization. Employees serve a central role in matters pertaining to managerial performance, change management, and overall organizational success. Through brilliant, enthusiastic, and employees, it is easy to integrate the preferred change in an organization’s operations (Bakker and Schaufeli, 2008). Bakker and Schaufeli classify employee engagement into three categories: commitment, dedication, and motivation. These three components are essential to guarantee that change management is achieved efficiently and fruitfully. According to Bakker and Schaufeli (2008), based on the Job Demands-Resource Model, engagement determines progressive organizational results. The optimal functioning of employees, in terms of motivation and health concerns is illustrated evidently in the JD-R model. Saks research also points out the relationship of job characteristic and job engagement. Through satisfactory motivation and good working environments, employees are more likely to be engaged in change management and its successful implementation in a work setting (Saks, 2006). In the study to test the model of antecedents against other existing theories, Saks unearthed the distinct dissimilarities of job and organization engagement. While the two may be related, the notable differences determine commitment and motivation at work. Similar to other studies like Bakker and Schaufeli’s (2008), Saks findings posit that employee engagement to some extent arbitrates the relationship concerning antecedent variables and significances. In Macey and Schneider’s “The Meaning of Employee Engagement” the vagueness of the term ‘employee engagement’ to academicians and practitioners is accentuated. It may be used differently to express psychological conditions or their consequences and experiences. Organizations provide an interactive and vibrant environment, coupled with customer and stakeholder anticipations (Hassin, 2010). Hassin emphasizes that to initiate change in an organization productively, it is obligatory to explore the existing work environment and organization structure. It is essential to understand the influences that oversee employee engagement to comprehend how to approach change management. Chew, Cheng, and Petrovic-Lazarevic undertook a comprehensive case study of the restaurant industry in Melbourne, which supports Hassin’s proclamations. The close interaction of employers and the workforce governs the level of employee engagement, which ultimately determines the existence of a business as it acclimatises to change. In essence this means that employee engagement has an influence on the success of change management (Chew, Cheng, and Petrovic-Lazarevic, 2006). Importantly, Chew, Cheng, and Petrovic-Lazarevic mention resistance to change as a detrimental factor in the change implementation process. Without passable devotion and motivation, employees are bound to resist change and fresh working conditions, which they may deem as beneficial only to the organization, and not to their individual concerns. In relation to employee engagement, the social exchange theory is an acknowledged and extensively used model as evidenced through Saks (2006) and Andrew and Sofian’s (2012, 500) investigations. The theory confirms that humans scrutinize their social relationships to determine the beneficial nature of the relationships. Andrew and Sofian’s centred a research study on 104 HR employees at the Inland Revenue Board of Malaysia based on the social exchange theory against the results of employee engagement. In its findings, it was unearthed that disengaged employees costs an organization adversely in terms of productivity and high maintenance expenses in terms of preparation and enlistment (Andrew and Sofian, 2012, 498). Engagement is the best form of employee loyalty towards an organization (Saks, 2006, 604). According to Todnem (2005, 369), the available theories pertaining to change management are mostly inconsistent and have no passable substantiation. The impulsive nature of change often triggers an organizational crisis, evidenced by Balogun and Hope Hailey (2004) findings that there is a 70% failure rate of all change platforms. Both Balogun and Hope Hailey (2004), Burnes, (2004), Carnall (2003), and Luecke (2003) agree that change is prompted by internal and external aspects that result in its variation. Ram and Prabhakar’s (2011) article “The Role of Employee Engagement in Work-Related Outcomes” presents an interesting model that examines employee engagement in relation to six important dynamics. 1. Job Characteristics 2. Perceptions of Procedural Justice 3. Intrinsic and Extrinsic Rewards 4. Perceived Supervisor Support 5. Perceived Organizational Support 6. Perceptions of Distributive Justice More to that, Ram and Prabhakar (2011, 49) emphasize Bakker and Schaufeli’s (2008) and Saks (2006) presumptions that job gratification, job engrossment, and intent to quit have a considerable effect on employee engagement. Effective change management can only be realized if there is job gratification, which often hinges on job characteristic and intrinsic and extrinsic job motivation aspects. Conclusion The conclusion of this review should outline some of the research gaps, evaluate the supportive and contradictory arguments made throughout the review, discuss the limitations and future of engagement in regards to the topic and summarize the literature review Through the review of the articles, it is evident that there is no comprehensive conceptualization of employee engagement. Each review seems to have its own definition, which largely hinges on organizational setup. Overall, organizations must adapt to survive in the present competitive business stage. Though not comprehensively defined, it is evident that employee engagement is an integral part of the adaptation process. List of references Andrew, O. and Sofian, S., 2012, Individual Factors and Work Outcomes of Employee Engagement. The 2012 International Conference on Asia Pacific Business Innovation & Technology Management, Pattaya, Thailand. Procedia - Social and Behavioural Sciences 40 (2012) 498 – 508 Bakker, A. and Schaufeli, W., 2008, Positive Organizational Behaviour: Engaged Employees In Flourishing Organizations. Journal of Organizational Behaviour Volume 29, 147–154 (2008). Balogun, J. and Hope V., 2004, Exploring Strategic Change, 2nd ed. London: Prentice Hall. Burnes, B, 2004, Managing Change: A Strategic Approach to Organisational Dynamics, 4th edn. Harlow: Prentice Hall. Chew, M., Cheng. J. and Petrovic-Lazarevic, S., 2006, Managers’ Role in Implementing Organizational Change: Case of the Restaurant Industry in Melbourne. Journal of Global Business and Technology, Volume 2, Number 1, Spring 2006 Hassin, A., 2010, Effective Diagnosis in Organization Change Management. Journal of Business systems, Governance, and Ethics, Vol. 5, No. 2. Kumar, P. and Swetha, G., 2011, A Prognostic Examination of Employee Engagement from its Historical Roots. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, Vol. 2, No. 3, June 2011. Macey, W. and Schneider, W., 2008, The Meaning of Employee Engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1 (2008), 3–30. Markos, S. and Sridevi, S., 2010, Employee Engagement: The Key to Improving Performance. International Journal of Business and Management Vol. 5, No. 12; December 2010. Ram, P. and Prabhakar G., 2011, The Role of Employee Engagement in Work-Related Outcomes. Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business Vol. 1, Issue. 3, March 2011(pp.47-61). Saks, A., 2006, Antecedents and Consequences of Employee Engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology Vol. 21 No. 7, 2006 pp. 600-619. Todnem, R., 2005, Organisational Change Management: A Critical Review. Journal of Change Management Vol. 5, No. 4, 369–380, December 2005. Read More