Disengaging From Engagement
bs_bs_banner
doi: 10.1111/1748-8583.12046
PROVOCATION SERIES PAPER
Disengaging from engagement
John Purcell, University of Bath
Human Resource Management Journal, Vol 24, no 3, 2014, pages 241–254
Two basic approaches to engagement are contrasted. Work engagement relates to an individual’s psychological state of mind while at work. The problems with this and its limited relevance to HRM are considered: its concern with a minority of employees, the way non-engaged staff are portrayed, the airbrushing out of conflict and the pernicious use of positive psychology. Employee or behavioural engagement is more relevant to HRM and employment relations but suffers from a lack of definition and a failure to specify the components that are associated with higher levels of employee engagement. It is usually a-contextual and lacks the subtlety of earlier work on HR and performance, while covering the same ground. Problems remain with research seeking to show the connections with financial performance.
Boiling engagement measures down to one score is particularly worrying. The management of employee engagement in the UK National Health Service illustrates that properly constructed studies of employee engagement can inform policies and practices to improve work relations, employee well-being and aspects of performance.
Contact: John Purcell, School of Management, University of Bath, Bath BA4 7AL, UK. Email: purjohn@gmail.com Keywords: work engagement; positive psychology; employee engagement; social exchange; performance; surveys
INTRODUCTION
T
he engagement ‘industry’ (Welbourne, 2011), better described by Macey and Schneider
(2008) as a ‘folk theory’, rolls on and gathers pace after the promising start made by
Kahn (1990). By now, most of the large consulting companies have sought to corner the profitable market of devising and selling their own engagement surveys with dubious constructs and measures (Briner, 2014), purporting to show links to performance with implied
doi: 10.1111/1748-8583.12046
PROVOCATION SERIES PAPER
Disengaging from engagement
John Purcell, University of Bath
Human Resource Management Journal, Vol 24, no 3, 2014, pages 241–254
Two basic approaches to engagement are contrasted. Work engagement relates to an individual’s psychological state of mind while at work. The problems with this and its limited relevance to HRM are considered: its concern with a minority of employees, the way non-engaged staff are portrayed, the airbrushing out of conflict and the pernicious use of positive psychology. Employee or behavioural engagement is more relevant to HRM and employment relations but suffers from a lack of definition and a failure to specify the components that are associated with higher levels of employee engagement. It is usually a-contextual and lacks the subtlety of earlier work on HR and performance, while covering the same ground. Problems remain with research seeking to show the connections with financial performance.
Boiling engagement measures down to one score is particularly worrying. The management of employee engagement in the UK National Health Service illustrates that properly constructed studies of employee engagement can inform policies and practices to improve work relations, employee well-being and aspects of performance.
Contact: John Purcell, School of Management, University of Bath, Bath BA4 7AL, UK. Email: purjohn@gmail.com Keywords: work engagement; positive psychology; employee engagement; social exchange; performance; surveys
INTRODUCTION
T
he engagement ‘industry’ (Welbourne, 2011), better described by Macey and Schneider
(2008) as a ‘folk theory’, rolls on and gathers pace after the promising start made by
Kahn (1990). By now, most of the large consulting companies have sought to corner the profitable market of devising and selling their own engagement surveys with dubious constructs and measures (Briner, 2014), purporting to show links to performance with implied
References: Alfes, K., Shantz, A., Truss, C. and Soane, E. (2013). ‘The link between perceived human resource management practices, engagement and employee behaviour: a moderated mediation model’. Appelbuam, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P. and Kallenberg, A. (2000). Manufacturing Advantage: Why High Performance Systems Pay Off, Ithaca, NY: ILR Press. Arkin, A. (2011). ‘Is engagement working?’ People Management, 1 November. Bakker, A. (2009). ‘Building engagement in the workplace’, in R. Burke and C. Cooper (eds), The Peak Performing Organization, Abingdon: Routledge. HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 24 NO 3, 2014 © 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Balain, S. and Sparrow, P. (2011). ‘Engaged with what? A systematic review of the construct of engagement’. Batt, R. (2002). ‘Managing customer services: human resource practices, quit rates and sales growth’. Batt, R. and Moynihan, L. (2004). ‘The viability of alternative call centre production models’, in S. Boselie, P., Dietz, G. and Boon, C. (2005). ‘Commonalities and contradictions in research on human resource management and performance’ Briner, R. (2014). ‘What is employee engagement and does it matter? An evidence-based approach’, in D CIPD (2011). Conflict Management Survey Report, London: CIPD. Dromey, J. (2014). Meeting the Challenge: Successful Employee Engagement in the NHS, London: IPA. Engage for Success (2014) Special Interest Group Output: The Future of Employee Engagement. Fletcher, L. and Robinson, D. (2014). ‘Measuring and understanding engagement’, in C. Truss, R. Francis, H. and Reddington, M. (2012). ‘Employer branding and organisational effectiveness’, in H. Francis, R. (2013). Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Enquiry, London: Department of Health. Gallie, D., Felstead, A., Green, F. and Inanc, H. (2013). Fear at Work in Britain: First Findings from the Skills and Employment Survey 2013 Gallup Business Journal (2012). ‘Engaged employees inspire company innovation’. Gallup Study, 12 October 2006. Gardiner, B. (2013). ‘Employee engagement’. Business World, Australia, 23 September. George, J. (2011). ‘The wider context, costs and benefits of work engagement’. European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology, 20: 1, 53–59. Goddard, J. (2014). ‘The psychologisation of employment relations?’ Human Resource Management Journal, 24: 1, 1–18. Guest, D. (2014). ‘Employee engagement: fashionable fad or long-term fixture?’, in C. Truss, R. Harter, J.K., Schmidt, F.L. and Hayes, T.L. (2002). ‘Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: a meta-analysis’ Hutchinson, S. and Purcell, J. (2010). ‘Managing ward managers for roles in HRM in the NHS: overworked and under-resourced’ Jenkins, S. and Delbridge, R. (2013). ‘Context matters: examining “soft” and “hard” approaches to employee engagement in two workplaces’ 24: 14, 2670–2691. Kahn, W. (1990). ‘Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work’. Kelliher, C., Hope-Hailey, V. and Farndale, E. (2014). ‘Employee engagement in multinational organisations’, in C 252 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 24 NO 3, 2014 Legge, K. (1995). ‘HRM: rhetoric, reality and hidden agendas’, in J. Storey (ed.), Human Resource Management: A Critical Text, London: Routledge. Lewis, R., Donaldson-Feilder, E. and Tharani, T. (2012). Managing for Sustainable Employee Engagement: Developing a Sustainable Framework, London: CIPD. Macey, W. and Schneider, B. (2008). ‘The meaning of employee engagement’. Industrial and Organisational Psychology, 1: 1, 3–30. MacLeod, D. and Clarke, N. (2009). Engaging for Success: Enhancing Performance through Employee Engagement Milgrom, P. and Roberts, J. (1992). Economics, Organization and Management, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. NHS Employers (2014). The Staff Engagement Toolkit: An Online Resource Supporting You to Increase Staff Engagement in Your Organisation Porter, M. (1980). Competitive Strategy, New York: Free Press. Purcell, J. (1995). ‘Corporate strategy and its link with human resource management strategy’, in J. Purcell, J. (2014a). ‘Can employee voice and participation unlock employee engagement?’ Insights: Melbourne Business and Economics, 15: 23–30. Purcell, J. (2014b). ‘Time to focus on employee voice as a prime antecedent of engagement: rediscovering the black box’, in D