Key Determinants Of Employee Value In Organisations

  

Key determinants of employee value in organisations

Introduction

Employee engagement is gaining its
prominence in management studies over the years considering its contribution in
organisational success (Esen, 2012). The term employee engagement is gained
popularity in past 20 years. Many scholars have written on this subject but
very less research have been done on this topic. This has created gap in
understanding the notion of employee engagement and formulation of strategies
for employee engagement within organisation. Shuck et
al (2017) defined employee engagement as "a positive active, work-related
psychological state operationalised by the maintenance, intensity, and
direction of cognitive, emotional, and behavioural energy. This
definition suggested employee engagement as a work related psychology.
Objective of this essay is to find out key forces which determine the value of
employee in organisation.  This essay helped
with an understanding of employee engagement and its significance within
organisation. Further a critical evaluation of employee engagement has been
done using the writing of previous scholars. Finally this essay provides brief
recommendation for improvement of future essay.

 According to Schaufeli et al (2002) employee
engagement can be defined as commitment and involvement of employees towards their
organisation and its value.  It
is extremely important for employees to hold positive attitude in workplace for
a positive outcome. This positive attitude of employees also addressed as
positive emotion connection of employees. Over the years many scholars have
came up with different explanation of employee engagement and it can be
summarised from those essay that employee engagement is only possible when
employees express them physically, emotionally and cognitively while performing
their roles. There are several factors which determine whether an employee is
an engaged employee.  Employee
performance is also associated with employee engagement and engaged employee
tends to turn as productive employee (Anitha, 2014).

According to Extremera et al (2012) it
has been really challenging to come up with a single definition of employee
engagement due to the difference in opinion, however along with several definition
there are several model and theories of employee engagement. Origin of those theories
re from two different areas of research and those are employee well being and
job burnout. There are two major theories which have successfully contributes
towards the essay of employee engagement and those are Kahn's employee
engagement theory and

In the first theory of Kahn (1990) he
interviewed counsellors of summer camp along with members of and architecture
firm regarding their engagement and disengagement at work.  He found through his research that there are
three main psychological conditions such as psychological safety, psychological
meaningfulness and psychological availability which decide the degree of engagement
of employee at work place (Saks
& Gruman, 2014). The more an
employee experiences these three psychological factors, the greater is the
engagement level.          

Psychological meaningfulness is the
amount of meaning one drive from their role within organisation (Garrick et al., 2014).
Employee feel useful when they are not taken for granted and their opinion
counts.  Workplace which recognise the
extra effort of employee in role self role play and offer incentives drive more
psychological meaningfulness.

Psychological Safety is another
significant attributes for driving employee engagement. Psychological safety
refers to the ability of employee to express true self without being scared of
its negative impact of image and career. Psychological availability refers to
the belief that one has to put emotional, psychological resources in self
performance of a role. It has been evident from the research work of Kahn that
employees could be more engaged in an organisation if employers are able to
provide right physical, emotional and psychological resources for a better role
performance (Saks &
Gruman, 2014)

The second
theory is based on Job burnout. Job burnout is a contrast of employee engagement.  According to Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter
(2001) job burnout is nothing but a result from miss matches in six areas of organisational
life. These six areas are workload, control, rewards, recognitions, community,
social support, values and perceived fairness.  The amount of gap between a person and these
six areas decided the likelihood of burnouts. It could be stated that
engagement is associated with workload, feeling of choice, control, appropriate
recognition, justice, supportive community and every possible positive
attributes of Organisation.  Job burnout
and employee engagement are contradicting terms, while mismatches drive burnout,
matches leads to employee engagement.

 Bakker, Tims & Derks (2012) stated that employee
engagement is a good tool for any organisation to gain competitive advantages over
competitors. After reviewing various literatures it can be found that employees
are the most significant asset of organisation and it cannot be duplicated by
the competitors. Employee engagement is a strong factor for any organisation
and helps to decide the faith of the organisation.

Over the years
many argument and opinion have been raised over the real notion of employee
engagement. The main debate was over the fact how employee engagement can be
defined and differentiated. Kahn first came out with an almost perfect
definition of employee engagement. 
Various scholars have suggested that employee engagement is associated
with HRM of organisation. The amount of support received from the HR managers
decides the level of employee engagement (Bakibinga, Vinje,  & Mittelmark, 2012). Empirical research
also suggested that HR managers are aware of different interest and contest in
organisation and it is not only between management and labour but also
functions of management.

According to Arrowsmith
& Parker (2013) HR has to be precise while they address employee concern and
how they reunite this to competitive plan. Arguably Dalal
et al (2012) stated that it remains
unclear how far and under what conditions HR managers need to consider HR
functions to pursue employee engagement initiatives.

Van Berkel et
al (2017) in their literature tried to bring vulnerable labour group in the
mainstream HRM.  This literature shifted
the focus of employee engagement to a different aspect. Unlike most of the
literature where employee engagement is associated with employees, in this
literature employers engagement have been conceptualised based on different played
by employers basis on strategic condition of organisation. Employer's
engagement is associated with HRM practices. Employers are supposed to comply
with minimum standards however they are also considered as partner of policy
making by local, regional and national government. According to this literature
employers engagement may be motivated by CSR concern. This article mainly deals
with vulnerable group of workers who have received moderate attention from the
HRM scholars.  It deals with the worker
who is outside or inside the labour market and belongs to vulnerable group. In
this article the scholar further discussed about vulnerable labour market group
that represent a large part of labour market in many countries.

This vulnerable
labour group is facing challenges to enter the labour market at a young age and
this is creating unemployment problem for worker. Economic recession is also creating
inequalities in labour market (Arrowsmith, &
Parker, 2013). The reality
is vulnerable workers creating challenges for organisational HRM. Addressing
these issues are the biggest challenges for HRM to gain long term future
success by organisation .Employer engagement has been discussed in this article
to ensure that employers prepare the vulnerable labour market for "job
ready".

On contrary Shuck
& Wollard (2010) in their scholarly article shifted their focus how HRM
managers have been constantly under the pressure of developing employee
engagement strategies. The biggest challenges
for HR managers are the knowledge gap
between the organisational need and capability of employees (Perrin, 2003). Organisations are mostly dependent of scholars and
researcher for innovative tools and technique for better employee engagement
along with expert HR managers who can efficiently deal with it. Effective
approaches by HR managers can help to reduce the knowledge gap within
organisation and come up with effective employee engagement strategies.

Employee
engagement is a challenge for most of the organisation as it requires a
collaborative effort from both the end. First management need to understand the
need of the organisation and performing ability of employees. It is extremely
important for organisation to formulate policies which cover the three
psychological factors of employees. In case organisation failed to meet these
psychological factors then there could be job burnout. Employee motivation and
employee satisfaction are two major factors here which many of the scholars
failed to identify. Unlike other scholars Schaufeli & Bakker (2010) define employee
engagement as individual's satisfaction and involvement and enthusiasm for
work. This suggests it is not only the involvement of employee but also
how enthusiastic employees are for any role play.

Conclusion &
Recommendation

The main purpose of this study was to determine
values of employee in organisation and from the above findings it can be
concluded that psychological safety, psychological meaningfulness and
psychological availability are three key forces which determines the value of
employee in organisation according to the employee engagement theory. It could
be found from this essay that employee engagement theory is based on employee wellbeing and job burnout. On
contrary disagreement or dissatisfaction
among employees can create job burnout. Along with employee engagement,
scholars have put their focus on employer engagement and it can be found that
employer engagement is important for better
policy formulation and long term organisational success. Job burnout is
another major aspect which needs understanding and improvement. It can be
suggested that more practical research is required for better understanding and
definition of employee engagement in future. Organisation should come up with
better employee management technique by introducing a balance work culture
within organisation. 

References &
Bibliography

Anitha, J. (2014). Determinants of employee engagement
and their impact on employee performance. International journal of
productivity and performance management, 63(3), 308.

Arrowsmith, J., & Parker, J. (2013). The meaning
of ‘employee engagement’for the values and roles of the HRM function. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(14),
2692-2712.

Arrowsmith,
J., & Parker, J. (2013). The meaning of ‘employee engagement’for the values
and roles of the HRM function. The International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 24(14), 2692-2712.

Bakibinga, P., Vinje, H. F., & Mittelmark, M. B.
(2012). Self-tuning for job engagement: Ugandan nurses’ self-care strategies in
coping with work stress. International Journal of Mental Health Promotion, 14,
3-12. doi:10.1080/14623730.2012.682754

Bakker, A. B., Tims, M., & Derks, D. (2012).
Proactive personality and job performance: The role of job crafting and work
engagement. Human relations, 65(10), 1359-1378.

Dalal,
R. S., Baysinger, M., Brummel, B. J., & LeBreton, J. M. (2012). The
relative importance of employee engagement, other job attitudes, and trait
affect as predictors of job performance. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 42(S1).

Esen, E. (2012). The role of trust on the relationship
between organizational engagement and corporate reputation. Journal of
Management & Economics, 19(1), 47-58.

Extremera, N., Sánchez‐García, M., Durán, M. A., & Rey, L. (2012).
Examining the psychometric properties of the utrecht work engagement scale in
two spanish multi‐occupational
samples. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 20(1),
105-110.

Garrick, A., Mak, A. S., Cathcart, S., Winwood, P. C.,
Bakker, A. B., & Lushington, K. (2014). Psychosocial safety climate
moderating the effects of daily job demands and recovery on fatigue and work
engagement. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 87(4),
694-714.

Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P.
(2001). Job burnout. Annual review of psychology, 52(1),
397-422.

Perrin,
T. (2003). Working today: Understanding what drives employee engagement. The
2003 Towers Perrin Talent Report, 2.

Saks, A. M., & Gruman, J. A. (2014). What do we
really know about employee engagement?. Human Resource Development
Quarterly, 25(2), 155-182.

Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). Defining
and measuring work engagement: Bringing clarity to the concept. Work
engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research, 10-24.

Schaufeli,
W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The
measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor
analytic approach. Journal of Happiness studies, 3(1),
71-92.

Shuck, B., & Wollard, K. (2010). Employee
engagement and HRD: A seminal review of the foundations. Human Resource
Development Review, 9(1), 89-110.

Shuck, B., Osam, K., Zigarmi, D., & Nimon, K.
(2017). Definitional and conceptual muddling: Identifying the positionality of
employee engagement and defining the construct. Human Resource
Development Review, 16(3), 263-293.

Van Berkel, R., Ingold, J., McGurk, P., Boselie, P.,
& Bredgaard, T. (2017). Editorial introduction: An introduction to employer
engagement in the field of HRM. Blending social policy and HRM research in
promoting vulnerable groups' labour market participation. Human
Resource Management Journal, 27(4), 503-513.

Share:

Read More

Accounting

Assessment Item 1

Developed
economies all have their own regulatory environment for accounting and
financial reporting. This assignment allows you to explore two different
regulatory environments of your choice, and to evaluate the theories of
regulation that best describe those environments.

This
assignment is in two parts, which you will combine into a single
report. Each will involve a review of the relevant literature to
establish the dominant views involved in each environment. Your
conclusion at the end of the report will identify the most important
findings for each review.

Part A

Select any two of the following countries:

1. Australia


2. United Kingdom


3. India


4. Singapore.

Undertake a literature review for each of these countries’ regulatory environment for financial reporting. For each regulatory environment, find commentary on:

1. The perceived problems of each system


2. How the environment works (who are the major decision makers, what legislation is needed etc.)


3. What is that country’s progress towards the adoption of IFRS?

Part B

Analyse each of your selected environments through the lens of Regulatory Capture Theory. To do this, you will have to conduct a literature review that will explain:

1. What Regulatory Capture Theory is and why is might be useful,


2. What characteristics might indicate that a regulatory environment might be “captured”.

Conclusion

Use
Regulatory Capture Theory to critique each of your selected
environments and advise of the extent that these environments might be
captured (and by whom), or indeed might not be. If you have detected
evidence of some capture, is this a good thing or a bad thing? Support
your argument with your observations in Parts A and B.

---

What to submit

You must submit your assessment in the form of a single report, in the following format:

Executive Summary

Use
the executive summary to summarise your topic and the key points of
what you found in the literature about your topic. This should be no
more than two paragraphs. Professional writers usually write part after
they have finished the report.

Introduction

This
is not the same as a synopsis. An introduction should be a roadmap to
your entire report: what the topic was, where you searched, what you
found, what the key points are.

An
introduction can take up to half a page. Write this after the
literature review and conclusion sections, but before the synopsis.

Report (2,000 words in total - 20 marks)

1. Part A: Comparison of two regulatory environments (1,000 words - 10 marks)


2. Part B: Analysis of each environment using Capture Theory (1,000 words - 10 marks)

Conclusion (500 words on your findings from using Capture Theory - 4 marks)

This
wraps up (summarises) the key points of the report. Use this section to
conclusively and clearly respond to the requirements of the topic.

In this part you specifically summarise your findings using Regulatory Capture Theory as your guide.

Normally
you would not receive marks for your literature review in this part of
the assignment, but in this case you are using Capture Theory to make
your summary. Therefore you get marks for your scholarship here, too.

Reference List

Place your references here. I expect quite a few. Each reference listed here must also
have a citation within the text of your literature review. The reverse
is also true: every citation of a source within your literature review must point to a reference here in your reference list.

The assessment criteria

As
you can probably guess, there is no single "correct" answer for this
assignment, although there can be many "incorrect" answers. You will be
assessed on:

• the
  quality of your scholarship (research, processing information, and
  finally the ability to present what your found out in a useful way) (80%)


• the quality of your English expression (10%)


• the quality (readability) of your presentation (10%).

You
must use APA referencing style for this assignment and you must be
consistent: you must reference all sources of your information. A
failure to reference properly will attract penalties of up to 5 marks.

To get solution visit our website www.sourceessay.com

Share:

Read More

Essay Help & Custom Essays

	HRMT20024 Term 3 2017 - Assessment 3 Guidelines
	Report on Managing and retaining staff
Assessment Task	Throughout the term, we have discussed news stories and the HR implications arising from these
	stories.
	For assessment 3, you will write a report as if you were a consultant to an organisation. You will
	write about one of the three news stories on Moodle (i.e. one on penalty rates, one on gender
	equality, and one on performance and rewards), identifying the problem, analyzing it in terms of the
	relevant theory and literature, and provide practical solutions.
	You must draw on the material relating to Strategic HRM (Week 1) as well as material from 2-3
	themes from Weeks 6 to Week 11 (i.e. employee relations challenges, managing diversity,
	performance management, learning and development, motivation and rewards, and employee
	turnover and retention).
	You should engage in extensive research within the academic literature to develop an argument
	with appropriate theoretical discussion and references. You must cite at least ten
	(10) relevant peer reviewed journal articles. You can cite other academic references such as
	books, conference papers, and book chapters but these will NOT be counted as part of the 10
	journal articles.

Suggested Report		Title page: It contains the name of the report, who prepared the report, for whom the report
format		was prepared, the nature of the report, the date the report was prepared.
		Executive summary (ideally be approx. 50-100 words): The executive summary is a one
		page (or less) statement of a report’s purpose, findings and recommendations, enabling the
		reader to see the "big picture" without getting absorbed in technicalities.
		Table of contents: List the page numbers for headings and sub headings of the report.
		Introduction (approx. 200 words): The introduction consists of two or three paragraphs in
		which the aims, structure and methodology of the report are outlined. It states clearly the
		purpose or main task of the report and what the reader can expect. Please include a thesis
		statement that clearly mentions the main purpose of the report and your argument.
		Body of report with Headings and Subheadings (approx. 1500 words): The main body of the
		report should be structured into logical sections by topic, using headings to organise arguments
		and evidence.
		Conclusion (approx. 250 words): The conclusion is a brief section in which the writer analyses
		the significance of the report's findings and reiterates the main points of the report. These
		findings must derive logically from material presented in the report. A generalisation is then
		drawn from the specific findings of the research. New information is not included in the
		conclusion.
		References: A Reference List is a listing of all external resources that were consulted and
		mentioned during research for the report, and information from which is directly referred to in the
		text of the report. It is strongly recommended to avoid secondary referencing in assessments.
		Read the references before mentioning in reference list.
		APA referencing.  For more information, see : https://www.cqu.edu.au/?a=14033
		Creating a consistent and professional looking document is important and demonstrates that you
		have taken care with the work. Ideally, use a simple font such as Times New Roman 12 for the
		body of the paper, 1.5 spacing, and bold 14 point for major headings and bold 12 point for minor
		headings.
		All assessments must be submitted through the Moodle site. No email submissions will be
		accepted. All assessments submitted electronically through Moodle must be through the Student
		Portal http://my.cqu.edu.au • Failure to submit electronically will be taken as a failure to submit
		and therefore a zero (0) score will apply to the specific assessment.
Plagiarism		Copy detection software (TurnitIn) is used in this course and work found in contravention of the
		copying and plagiarism rules will be investigated. Penalties apply in the case of proven
		instances of copying, plagiarism and academic dishonesty.
		Please check the following links to know more about TurnitIn:
		http://turnitin.com/en_us/training/student-training/viewing-originality-reports
		http://turnitin.com/en_us/training/student-training/about-originalitycheck
		TurnitIn is only a tool and judgement needs to be used when you view your Originality Report.
		TurnitIn does not make a judgement as to what is referenced properly, it highlights the non-
		original material in a piece of work. You should use the similarity score as a guide only and must
		then check the originality report to determine whether or not changes need to be made to the
		assessment.
Required		Students must familiarise themselves with the following policies and procedures at
		http://policy.cqu.edu.au: Assessment of Coursework Policy; Assessment of Coursework
		Principles; Assessment of Coursework Procedures

To get solution visit our website www.sourceessay.com

Share:

Read More