Overview of the Finance Industry
Lack of Job Performance
The finance industry organizations such as T&D Associates as well as other industry organizations confront that lack of job performance due to poor worker engagement even though very
talented skilled staff members are in the organization. There is a question
about whether people in organizations are effectively engaged with their jobs. According
to Gallup, employees who are highly engaged in their organization produce high
levels of customer care, retention, and productivity and generate higher
profits (Luthans and Peterson, 2002). According to the study done by
Arifin, Nirwanto and Manan, the role of employee engagement was needed to
maximize job satisfaction stimulus to further improve job performance. (Arifin,
Nirwanto and Manan, 2019). Therefore, employee engagement is important for
better job performance and the success of the organization.
Introduction of Employee Engagement
Engagement of employees is about the degree of passion and
commitment that an employee has to their job. The involvement of the employees in
the activities of an organization, it determines job satisfaction as well as the
morale and motivation of the staff members. Consequently, these motivated
workers will be more productive hence exhibiting better performance. Further, the engagement of an employee entails
more than just job satisfaction. This refers to the extent of bonding or
relationship among workers, organization, and colleagues about duty,
emotions, and commitment.
“We theorise that engagement, conceptualized as the
investment of an individual's complete self into a role, provides a more
comprehensive explanation of relationships with performance than do well-known
concepts that reflect narrow aspects of the individual’s self.” (Rich, Lepine and Crawford, 2010)
Deriba, Sinke, Ereso and Badacho (2017) recognized that the
main factors have to be in place for employee engagement to be successful and
those factors are,
Psychological meaningfulness, safety and availability.
Psychological meaningfulness however, implies that the
employees should feel to be worthwhile, useful, valuable and important,
especially if their work is challenging, varied and is creative allowing them
to be autonomous.
Safety depicts the ability by the employees
to operate without having fear or negative consequences to their self image,
status and career.
Availability reflects the
ability by the employees to possess
the physical, emotional and psychological requirements
that are required to be employed in their work roles. (Deriba et al.,
2017)..
Kahn, W.A. (1990) defines employee engagement as “the
harnessing of organization members’ selves to their work roles; in engagement,
people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally
during role performances”. According to Kahn, employee engagement can be
identified in different aspects such as physical, cognitive and emotional way.
In the cognitive aspect, employees are concerned about their belief in the
organization and the emotional aspect considers negative and positive ideas of
the employees about the organization and its leaders. According to the
expression of Kahn, engagement means to be psychologically as well as
physically present when occupying and performing an organisational role.
Definitions
There are different explanation for employee engagement
create more difficulty in examining employee engagement in different protocols.
Most often employee engagement has been defined as an emotional and
intellectual commitment to the organisation (Baumruk 2004, Richman 2006 and
Shaw 2005) or the amount of discretionary effort exhibited by employees in
their job (Frank et al 2004). Although it is acknowledged and accepted that
employee engagement is a multi-faceted construct, as previously suggested by
Kahn (1990), Truss et al (2006) define employee engagement simply as ‘passion
for work’, a psychological state which is seen to encompass the three
dimensions of engagement discussed by Kahn (1990), and captures the common
theme running through all these definitions.
Engagement vs other concepts
According to Saks (2006), Organisational Commitment
is a term also distinct from organizational Engagement can be described as the
kind of feeling an individual has towards an institution argued, therefore,
that “engagement is not just an attitude, but rather a measure of one’s extent
to which they are concentrating on their work and engrossed in their function.
On the other hand, May et al (2004) engagement is most closely associated with the constructs of job involvement and ‘flow’ (Csikszentmihalyi 1990). Job involvement is defined as ‘a cognitive or belief state of psychological identification’ (Kanungo 1982). Unlike engagement, it focuses more on what an employee does to use himself/herself while at work. Secondly, unlike job involvement, while much attention is paid to cognition as well as attitude in job engagement, others include such emotional aspects as behaviours.
The basic characteristics of an engaged employee are:
They are aware of their role, they know what they are
supposed to do and they want to do it.
They remain loyal to their employers and work productively.
These individuals are driven to improve the performance of
their companies, while also understanding what this accomplishment would
signify.
This includes being a rational, and emotional part of the
organisation hence highly motivated to work effectively.
Conclusion
Therefore,
employee engagement is vital for a company’s success as it is closely
associated with job satisfaction among others. Creating and sustaining employee
engagement also requires effective communication. Those motivated employees are
generally more productive and better performers. Besides, they often
demonstrate more loyalty towards a firm’s moral principles and objectives.
Employers
can boost the participation of their workers through several methods such as
specifying expectations, giving bonuses and promotions for good performances,
giving updates on how the business is doing and providing frequent feedback.
Some of the approaches include ensuring that people are appreciated and treated
respectfully and that their suggestions are not only being listened to but
also, they are understood by the organisation. Employees who feel involved
believe that their job makes sense, know that their manager supports them, and
they trust in the achievement of the success of his/her company.
References
What effect does poor performance have on employee engagement?
ReplyDeleteThe connection between poor performance and employee engagement is complex, far-reaching. Employee engagement may fall when individuals or organizations show poor performance. It is a vicious circle that harms both the individual employee and also the overall work environment. Here are several ways in which the lack of performance can impact employee engagement:
DeleteDemotivation and Disengagement:
Feeling that people are not getting the performance they should be, whether from themselves or others, can contribute to demotivation and disengagement. For some people, it will appear as though their efforts are in vain and the organization does not prioritize excellence leading to a general loss of enthusiasm for work there.
Impact on Team Dynamics:
One poor performer can affect the dynamics of an entire team. Underperforming colleagues may also leave high-achieving employees frustrated and burdened by having to pick up the slack. This may lead to friction, lack of cooperation and deter the establishment of a positive team atmosphere.
Erosion of Trust:
Poor performance will wear away trust in the team and between employees and leadership. Trust is a key aspect of employee engagement. When trust deteriorates, the level of employee commitment naturally falls along with it.
Reduced Job Satisfaction:
Workers who observe or suffer from underperformance may lose interest in their jobs. Thus job satisfaction is very closely related to engagement, and when workers are dissatisfied they tend not to expend that extra effort above what's required.
Negative Impact on Organizational Culture:
Widespread poor performance can lead to a bad corporate culture. A culture that allows mediocrity may force high performers to leave the organization or attract those who accept substandard performance.
Agreed. Then, How job satisfaction influences on job performance.?
ReplyDeleteTharindu, If poor job satisfaction will result in poor job performance. Luthans (1985) quotes a comprehensive definition given by Locke. A pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experience. Job satisfaction is a result of employees’ perception of how well their job provides those things which are viewed as important. Job satisfaction is also defined as reintegration of affect produced by individual ’s perception of fulfillment of his needs in relation to his work and the surrounding it (Saiyaden, 1993). Organ and Hammer (1991) pointed out that job satisfaction represents a complex assemblage of cognition, emotion and tendencies.
DeleteReferences
Luthans, F. (1985) Organizational Behavior, McGill Illinois
Saiyaden, M. A. (1993) Human Resource Management, New Delhi, McGraw-Hill.
Organ, D. W. and Hammer W. C. (1991) Organizational Behavior : An Applied Psychological Approach, Business Publications : Texas
What are the definitions for “employee engagement”?
ReplyDeleteThe harnessing of organisation members' selves to their work roles; in engagement, people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally during role performances. Kahn (1990)
DeleteAn engaged employee is someone who feels involved, committed, passionate, and empowered and demonstrates those feelings in work behaviour Mone and London (2010)
Being positively present during the performance of work by willingly contributing intellectual effort, experiencing positive emotions and meaningful connections to others. Kerstin Alfes et al. CIPD (2010)
Individual's involvement and satisfaction with as well as enthusiasm for work. Harter, Schmidt and Hayes (2002)
The extent to which people value, enjoy, and believe in what they do. DDI (2005)
A positive fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigour, dedication and absorption. Schaufeli and Salanova (2002)
Passion for work Truss et al. (2006)
The extent to which employees commit to something or someone in their organisation, how hard they work and how long they stay as a result of that commitment. Corporate Leadership Council, (2004)
A positive attitude held by the employee towards the organisation 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 organisation. The organisation must work to develop and nurture engagement which requires a two‐way relationship between employer and employee. Robinson(2004)
Illusive force that motivates employees to higher levels of performance. Wellins and Concelman (2005)
The degrees to which employees are satisfied with their jobs, feel valued, and experience collaboration and trust. Engaged employees will stay with the company longer and continually find smarter, more effective ways to add value to the organisation. The end result is a high performing company where people are flourishing and productivity is increased and sustained. Janson and Janson cited in (Catteeuw F, Flynn E, Vonderhorst J 2007)
References
DeleteKahn, W. A. (1990). “Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work.”Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692–724.
Mone, E.and M. London (2010). Employee engagement through effective performance management: A practical Guide for Managers. New York: Routledge.
Alfes K. K., E.C. Truss, Soane, C.Rees, and M. Gaten by (2010, January). Creating an engaged workforce.CPID research report. Retrieved from http://www.cipd.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/DD66E557-DB90-4F07-8198-87C3876F3371/0/Creating_engaged_workforce.pdf [Accessed on 19th December,2023]
Harter J.K., F.L.Schmidt, and Hayes T.L. (2002). “Business unit level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: a meta-analysis.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 268–279.
Development Dimensions International (2005).Predicting Employee Engagement. Development Dimensions International, Inc., MMV. Retrieved from www.ddiworld.com [Accessed on 19th December,2023]
Salanova, M., S.Agut, and J. M. Peiro (2005). “Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: The mediation of service climate.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1217–1227.
Truss, C., E. Soane, C.Edwards, K.Wisdom, A.Croll, and J. Burnett (2006).Working Life: Employee Attitudes and Engagement.CIPD- Personnel and development publications.
Corporate Leadership Council (2004). Driving Performance and Retention Through Employee Engagement.Corporate Executive Board.
Robinson D., S. Perryman, and S. Hayday (2004).The Drivers of Employee Engagement. Institute for Employment Studies. Retrieved from http://www.employmentstudies.co.uk/pubs/summary.php?id=408 [Accessed on 19th December,2023]
Wellins, R. and J. Concelman. (2005). Creating a culture for engagement. Workforce Performance Solutions. Retrieved from www.WPSmag.com [Accessed on 19th December,2023]
Catteeuw F., E. Flynn and J.Vonderhorst (2007). “Employee engagement: boosting productivity in turbulent times.”Organization Development Journal, 25 (2), 151–157