The Royal Bank of Scotland (2005) defines engagement as the state of emotional and
intellectual commitment to the group and lists its components as satisfaction (how
much I like working here), commitment (how much I want to be here) and performance
(how much I want to and actually do in achieving results).
The Hay Group, as reported by Thompson (2002), refers to their concept of ‘engaged performance’ which is ‘about understanding why working for a particular organization is attractive to different kinds of individuals… And which looks at the hearts and mind reasons why people work for you’.
The Institute of Employment Studies (Bevan et al, 1997) defines engagement as: ‘A positive attitude held by the employee towards the organization and its values. An engaged employee is aware of business context, and works closely with colleagues to improve performance within the job for the benefit of the organization.’
These all overlap with the traditional definition of commitment as being concerned with attachment to the organization. There is no reason why this should not be the case – the two concepts are after all closely connected – but there is some value in distinguishing between commitment to the organization and commitment to the job,and treating the former as organizational commitment and the latter as job engagement.
Many people are more committed to their work than the organization that provides the work, for example researchers in universities or research establishments. Others take a transient view of their organization as a stepping stone in their career that provides them with the sort of experience they want but to which they feel no particular loyalty. If the organization wants people in the latter categories to work harder and better, it may well want to focus on the work they provide and opportunities for development they offer and place less emphasis on organizational commitment. If the organization wants to concentrate more on retention, loyalty and people putting themselves out for the organization rather than themselves, then policies to encourage commitment come to the fore. Best of all, it is recognized that both commitment and engagement need attention but that different approaches may be necessary although they can be mutually supportive – increased commitment to the organization can produce higher levels of job engagement; more job engagement can increase commitment to the organization. The rest of this chapter is devoted to exploring both concepts.
The Hay Group, as reported by Thompson (2002), refers to their concept of ‘engaged performance’ which is ‘about understanding why working for a particular organization is attractive to different kinds of individuals… And which looks at the hearts and mind reasons why people work for you’.
The Institute of Employment Studies (Bevan et al, 1997) defines engagement as: ‘A positive attitude held by the employee towards the organization and its values. An engaged employee is aware of business context, and works closely with colleagues to improve performance within the job for the benefit of the organization.’
These all overlap with the traditional definition of commitment as being concerned with attachment to the organization. There is no reason why this should not be the case – the two concepts are after all closely connected – but there is some value in distinguishing between commitment to the organization and commitment to the job,and treating the former as organizational commitment and the latter as job engagement.
Many people are more committed to their work than the organization that provides the work, for example researchers in universities or research establishments. Others take a transient view of their organization as a stepping stone in their career that provides them with the sort of experience they want but to which they feel no particular loyalty. If the organization wants people in the latter categories to work harder and better, it may well want to focus on the work they provide and opportunities for development they offer and place less emphasis on organizational commitment. If the organization wants to concentrate more on retention, loyalty and people putting themselves out for the organization rather than themselves, then policies to encourage commitment come to the fore. Best of all, it is recognized that both commitment and engagement need attention but that different approaches may be necessary although they can be mutually supportive – increased commitment to the organization can produce higher levels of job engagement; more job engagement can increase commitment to the organization. The rest of this chapter is devoted to exploring both concepts.
No comments:
Post a Comment