Employee Engagement in a South African Context [1 ed.] 9781869225438, 9781869225421

Citation preview

EMPLOYEE

ENGAGEMENT

in a South African context

Edited by Hester Nienaber and Nico Martins

EMPLOYEE

ENGAGEMENT

in a South African context

ENDORSEMENTS This well-written and carefully edited book provides a new insight into the meanings and experience of Employee Engagement in South Africa, and indeed more generally. Drawing on issues and concepts such as motivation; strategy; diversity and cultural sensitivity; power dynamics; trust and respect, the chapter authors encourage the reader to think carefully about the influences for and against such engagement. The significance of the physical, emotional and cognitive personhood of employees, their interaction and engagement with others (including co-workers and managers) and with working practices are also considered. Overall the detailed analysis and the engaging presentation makes this book an invaluable read for both practitioners and academics.  Gayle Letherby, BA (Hons), PhD, Honorary Professor of Sociology, Plymouth University Employee Engagement is currently conceived as one of the important key business drivers for organisational success. It is thus important to conceptualise and define the concept for the business and academic environment in South Africa. A criticism of Employee Engagement might be that it does not provide a clear base for action. This book, however, extensively addresses South African and African case studies and applications, not forgetting the international context, that are important for practitioners. The book not only makes an important contribution to the concept of Employee Engagement from an underlying psychological perspective and its application in the work environment, but also focuses on practical applications and solutions for South African practitioners in a multi-cultural environment. The text covers a broad range of topics in relation to Employee Engagement and is to be welcomed by both academics and practitioners who work in the field. Dr Ellen Caroline Martins, Organisational Diagnostics Profitable growth and value creation in the modern business is of utmost importance to ensure survival in the fiercely competitive global market.  That is why industry leaders continually have to innovate, reduce manufacturing costs and increase productivity in attempts to remain competitive.  In the Continuous Improvement discipline, employee engagement has proved to be a key element of sustained profitable growth and value creation.  Without effective employee engagement any roll-out of a new strategy or organisational change is bound to fail.  The authors of this book have succeeded in demonstrating the importance of employee engagement to ensure sustainable strategy implementation.  Prof. Nienaber quite correctly confirms in Chapter Two the relationship between sustainable strategy roll-outs and effective employee engagement.  I have no doubt that even though this book is written for the South African context it has potential to become one of the most valuable manuals for practitioners in globally competitive organisations.  Japie van Heerden BSc (Operations Research), MBA, Lean Sigma Master Black Belt and Continuous Improvement Specialist, Clariant International Ltd This book will prove very valuable to organisations as it delineates, in a practical and theoretically sound manner, the importance of work engagement. It also demonstrates how effective and efficient people management can contribute to the optimisation of operational costs and ultimately business results. Of specific interest  is the emphasis on the importance of research with multicultural measurement instruments and of considering the over-cultural dynamics of the highly diversified South African workplace. Incorporation of recently developed, overarching models of work engagement highlights the literary relevance of these authors’ work, whilst practical examples of diverse experiences and research make for an interesting and enlightening read. Prof Cecile Nieuwenhuizen, Head: Department Business Management 
 Faculty of Management, University of Johannesburg

Until 2008 Gold Fields had never conducted an employee survey. For some of us, employee engagement was i) theory; ii) something associated with blue-chip companies; and iii) a “Western” concept. One of the insights gained after we conducted the Benchmark of Engagement Questionnaire in Ghana was the notion of groups rather than individuals – collectivism versus individualism. Previously, the respect junior supervisors had for older subordinates made it very difficult for them to manage. The process of running a survey and addressing the issues identified using an industrial theatre programme worked very well for our mine. Ghanaians by nature love storytelling, and appreciating the channel through which to address their concerns was of great importance. Even within the context of seeking opinions, it was very important to understand how to obtain a more honest response. My experience with the Benchmark of Engagement and the approach to eliciting employees’ feedback and addressing them has moved me into “living” what the term engagements means. If leadership can adapt a well-customised and structured way of ensuring employees are connected, it creates a good opportunity to reduce labour agitation and unnecessary demands. It was evident after the climate survey and industrial theatre that we appreciated more what employees perceived as important, and that assisted with engagement strategies. The book accurately describes how engagement can be very meaningful to organisations and the people in them. William Empeh, Manager: Talent/Learning and Development, Gold Fields: Ghana South African institutions, whether they be companies, universities or enterprises, comprise complex collective societies with diverse social systems, cultures, languages, thinking patters, race groups and beliefs. The advantage of having such a diverse group of people in organisations is often misjudged and overlooked and the special gifts of individuals are not utilised to co-create prosperous companies. If companies can master the integral approach and apply the principles of inclusivity and engagement, and challenge the patterns within the individual, group and organisational psyche to expend energy to perform and engage people in a sustainable inclusive manner, it will unleash energy that will result in achieving a shared consciousness, principles and values. Engagement studies that have a multi-culturally sensitive way of describing this human energy in systems are of cardinal importance in South Africa and emerging economies. The book is important in that it highlights the importance of optimising human energy in systems. Henk van Zyl, Director: Human Resources, Interstate Bus Lines The philosophy of the BeQ envisages creating a climate of inclusion and inclusivity that unleashes human energy. Four different archetypes (to use a Jungian term) are the result, namely Engagement, Involvement, Disengagement and Apathy, each with repeating patterns of thought and behaviour. The task of the co-created interventions is to align individual values and performance with the values and performance of the organisation. The BeQ is underpinned by scientific research (both qualitative and quantitative) and the researcher uses triangulation to inform the analysis. The engagement constructs of “Me” (individual, worldview)/“We” (team, climate)/“They” (organisation, culture) are key elements that are analysed within a multi-cultural context (Jung’s over-culture). The researcher provides a trans-level analysis that is informed by Spiral Dynamics (Human Niche Theory) in the form of a narrative to enable leaders to contextually interpret engagement dynamics. This analysis and emerging story enable leaders to first understand the thinking structures that create engagement perceptions and second to focus workplace interventions addressing primary causes.

The BeQ is “a philosophy of how to rewire the energy in the system in a positive way, taking diverse world views into account, unleashing the voices for radical transformation”. Dr Rica’s ability to see the dynamics in complex organisational and community systems and her skill in hearing different voices, combined with her sharp mind and observation as an ethnographic and mixed-method researcher, give us a gift from which we can learn how to authentically engage in organisations with a multi-culturally sensitive lens. The book is highly recommended. Dr Anna-Rosa le Roux, Head: Organisational Effectiveness, Woolworths Financial Services This book, which assists leaders to first understand engaged dynamics, second to position engagement as a strategic initiative in organisations and third to appreciate the importance of measuring engagement in a multi-culturally sensitive way, is a critical addition to current literature. During my time as a multi-cultural international researcher at Mandala Consulting, I had the opportunity to experience employee engagement studies first-hand. Dr Rica Viljoen’s business study of the Benchmark of Engagement Quotient gives insight into real engagement and not a superficial “keep management satisfied” way of participative leadership. We managed to pinpoint specific multi-cultural dynamics. The difference that I perceived in a workforce that moved from “involved” to “totally engaged” will be entrenched in my mind for the rest of my life. I remember the first time that I interacted with some of the workforce, especially on the first-line management level. People were doing what they had to do in order to keep management satisfied. As engagement was encouraged and the specific interventions progressed, more and more people became aware of the importance and benefits of being a true leader. Engagement in plain terms, in my opinion, means doing more than what is expected willingly through participative leadership. The attitude of the employees changed from being a “worker” to a “participative leader”. Taking up their roles and being committed showed in the way they engaged with each other and how they referred to the leaders; at first “the GM” (General Manager) and then “Our GM”. During a first-line management programme designed by Dr Viljoen, I gave the attendees a business case scenario to translate leadership at different levels. The attendees were challenged to come up with suggestions on how to make the mine profitable. The engagement of these employees was evident. They took that task so seriously that they would leave the training venue an hour after close of business and were back the following day to continue with the exercise. They were given an opportunity to present their business case to their management and participated as teams in convincing management to make a difference and by being engaged in the solution and not the challenges. Being able to measure sustainability with an instrument as accurate as the Benchmark of Engagement Quotient has proved year on year that being engaged as a united workforce will ultimately lead to success in all fields of business, from the financial, production and people perspectives. The book not only explains the importance of engagement; it also provides practical examples of how engagement can be measured, how feedback on engagement studies can be dealt with and how humans in organisations can come together around organisational goals. Rene de Beer, Group Human Capital Officer, Renlyn Group Any manager/leader should know the following: From personal experience as a newly appointed General Manager in a foreign country, I have seen the value added to the business by moving from a partially engaged to a fully engaged work force. Our job as managers is to move people. The only way to move people is to ensure that there is trust.

In our current environment with a strongly unionised labour force, we are challenged by a low-skilled, productivity-dominated, unmotivated workforce. We are constantly engaging with different consultants to find quick solutions, with little success. An engaged workforce is a complex, multifaceted, systemic phenomenon. There are no short cuts. Without understanding the systemic causalities and the multi-cultural dynamics, more harm than good can be done. In any diverse, multi-cultural environment it is very important to ensure that you (management) listen to the voice of the workforce. NOTE: NOT TO INDIVIDUALS WHO DRIVE THEIR OWN AGENDA. A lot of constant work is needed over a period of three to four years – until the momentum in the system is bigger than the resistance. All interventions should form part of the overall strategy. Intervention should be considered in the individual, group, organisational and social domains. Step by step, issues that surface should be addressed until the only remaining issues are to be found in the underlying beliefs in the system about diversity, safety and culture. Then an organisational event such as industrial theatre can wire the human energy in the system around the strategy. This was the key for me when we worked in Ghana. Industrial theatre communicated across culture, languages, beliefs and desires.A critical prerequisite that should not be underestimated is the role that leadership plays in a strategy like this. Without the full support of leadership, there can be no significance for a process like this. Nor can there be commitment. The leadership should fully support the initiative and then work with it collectively. I never would have believed in the engagement concept if I had not been introduced to it. I was given an opportunity, embraced the idea and got my entire management structure to embrace it. A book like this will equip managers with tools to understand the principle of engagement, which is the reason I can support this book. I have compared my personal experience of working with a workforce that is not engaged and with an engaged work force. The result of not moving your teams is catastrophic. Characteristics of a fully engaged workforce Motivated team Good safety results Trust between management and workforce leads to excellent communication (direct communication and not via a third party, e.g. organised labour). Workforce has a voice

Teams that understand the vision and values of a company

Advantages

Risks when a work force is not engaged Self-directed  dictated, not self-directive   safety results declining A highly skilled workforce results highly organised labour in elevated productivity. activities no trust no common vision increased illegal and fraudulent activities Every individual feels that he or little participation by the she has made a contribution, and workforce low goodwill this reduces organised labour involvement in your business. The team experienced this when they got feedback from all the engagement interventions. Teams live the vision and values Teams distrust the motives behind vision and values of the company (PROVIDED statements. THAT MANAGEMENT LEAD BY EXAMPLE).

Characteristics of a fully engaged workforce Turnover of personnel reduced

Innovation increased

Advantages People work for a boss who listens to them

When the team feels that they have a voice they will contribute.

Risks when a work force is not engaged If employees do not work with and trust management they will leave at the next opportunity. little contribution

In my opinion not working on the engagement of workers is taking too high a risk. As leaders, we have no choice but to fulfil the role of true, visibly felt leadership and that is to plan (strategise), organise (get the people together around strategies such as safety), lead (which means we must provide meaning, a vision and motivation) and control (which becomes very easy in an engaged space as employees and groups manage themselves).  The book is a great tool to help leaders with the important leadership task of getting people engaged. Christo Viljoen, Vice-President Engineering: Surface Operations, SibanyeGold The author, Dr Viljoen, speaks with authority on the subject of Employee Engagement from an academic perspective as well as from her vast personal experience. She is an amazing catalyst, and impacts any group of people regardless of culture, gender or age. I have had the privilege of watching her mesmerise people from the executives in an organisation to the operatives with the same magic. You will want to apply the wisdom she shares in your own day-to-day life.  Loraine I Laubscher PhD, Human Niches, Spiral Dynamics for Africa

EMPLOYEE

ENGAGEMENT

in a South African context

A scientific approach to context-specific measurement

Edited by Hester Nienaber & Nico Martins

2016

Copyright © KR Publishing the editors, Hester Nienaber & Nico Martins, and all contributors All reasonable steps have been taken to ensure that the contents of this book do not, directly or indirectly, infringe any existing copyright of any third person and, further, that all quotations or extracts taken from any other publication or work have been appropriately acknowledged and referenced. The publisher, editors and printers take no responsibility for any copyright infringement committed by an author of this work. Copyright subsists in this work. No part of this work may be reproduced in any form or by any means without the written consent of the publisher or the author. While the publisher, editors and printers have taken all reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy of the contents of this work, they take no responsibility for any loss or damage suffered by any person as a result of that person relying on the information contained in this work. First published in 2016 ISBN: 978-1-86922-542-1  eISBN: 978-1-86922-543-8 (PDF eBook) Published by KR Publishing P O Box 3954 Randburg 2125 Republic of South Africa Tel: (011) 706-6009 Fax: (011) 706-1127 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.kr.co.za Printed and bound: Mega Digital (Pty) Ltd. Parow Industria, Cape Town Typesetting, layout and design: Cia Joubert, [email protected] Cover design: Marlene de Villiers, [email protected] Editing and proofreading: Jill Bishop, [email protected] Project management: Cia Joubert, [email protected]

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to thank our collaborators for their contributions, which required considerable time, effort and commitment, sharing their insights and experience to benefit of our readers.

TABLE OF CONTENTS ABOUT THE EDITORS........................................................................................................ vi ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS............................................................................................ ix FOREWORD by Holly Schiffrin........................................................................................... xi INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. xiv Contextualisation.................................................................................................... xiv The need for, purpose of and audience for a South African book on employee engagement ................................................................................................... xiv Structure of the book.............................................................................................. xv Chapter 1: Theoretical framework for employee engagement by Abigail Moshoeu........1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 1 CONCEPTUALISATION OF ENGAGEMENT FROM PRACTITIONERS AND ACADEMICS.........3 Business approaches to engagement........................................................................4 Academic approaches to engagement......................................................................5 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS UNDERPINNING ENGAGEMENT.........................................8 Kahn’s (1990) psychological conditions.....................................................................8 Psychological meaningfulness...................................................................................9 Psychological safety...................................................................................................9 Psychological availability.........................................................................................10 Empirical validation of psychological conditions.....................................................10 Schaufeli and Bakker (2004): burnout and engagement.........................................11 Vigour......................................................................................................................12 Dedication...............................................................................................................12 Absorption...............................................................................................................13 Empirical validation of burnout and engagement...................................................13 Drivers of engagement............................................................................................14 Job demand-resources model.................................................................................14 OUTCOMES OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT..................................................................... 18 Organisational commitment....................................................................................19 Job satisfaction........................................................................................................19 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................... 20 Chapter 2: Engagement and strategy by Hester Nienaber..............................................21 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 21 ENGAGEMENT ................................................................................................................ 21 Engagement at the individual level........................................................................ 22 Engagement at the organisational level................................................................. 24 i

Synthesis of engagement.........................................................................................26 FROM ENGAGEMENT TO STRATEGY................................................................................26 Competitive advantage............................................................................................27 Human resources as a dimension of competitive advantage..................................27 Strategy failure........................................................................................................29 ENGAGEMENT AND STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION IN SOUTH AFRICA............................30 The six lowest-ranked statements in the 2014 and 2015 surveys...........................31 MANAGEMENT ACTION TO IMPROVE ENGAGEMENT AND STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION...................................................................................................31 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................... 32 Chapter 3: Engagement in multi-cultural environments: Reflections and theoretical development by Rica Viljoen...................................................................................33 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................... 33 Engagement in multi-cultural settings.....................................................................35 The importance of construct-based assessments...........................................35 The importance of a scientific approach to organisational research...............35 The importance of describing cultural dynamics.............................................35 The importance of hearing the participants....................................................36 The importance of involving the leader...........................................................36 The importance of understanding gender dynamics.......................................37 The importance of understanding power dynamics........................................37 The importance of an enquiry design that stimulates inclusivity....................38 The importance of designing an inclusive data-gathering process..................39 The importance of understanding causalities..................................................39 The importance of voluntary participation......................................................39 The importance of confidentiality...................................................................40 A universal conceptualisation of engagement.........................................................41 Introduction.....................................................................................................41 Engagement as human energy in the system to perform............................... 41 Concepts of inclusion, a climate of inclusion and inclusivity...................................41 Engagement conceptualised............................................................................42 The benefit of an engaged workforce..............................................................43 The BeQ philosophy as multi-cultural alternative...................................................44 The focus of the BeQ.......................................................................................44 Constructs that the BeQ describes..................................................................44 Levels of engagement......................................................................................46 Being indifferent or apathetic..........................................................................47 Vicious cycles of low human systemic energy – disengaged...........................48 The BeQ delimited...........................................................................................48

ii

Unique properties of the BeQ philosophy.......................................................48 Systemic implications of the BeQ....................................................................49 Conducting a BeQ study..................................................................................49 Design principles of a multi-cultural BeQ session............................................51 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................... 52 Chapter 4: The current state of employee engagement in South Africa by Nico Martins.......................................................................................................53 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................... 53 The measurement of engagement..........................................................................54 The development of an employee engagement index....................................62 Tendencies emerging from South African results............................................63 Comparative results of demographic groups...........................................................64 The management of employee engagement in South Africa..................................66 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................. 66 Chapter 5: Trust and engagement by Hartmut Von der Ohe...........................................69 TRUST AND ENGAGEMENT..............................................................................................69 THE CONCEPT OF TRUST.................................................................................................72 Defining trust...........................................................................................................72 Models of trust........................................................................................................75 The model of Mayer et al................................................................................75 Martins’ (2000) model of trust........................................................................79 Conceptual unified trust model.......................................................................81 Trust in leadership...................................................................................................82 The dark side of trust..............................................................................................84 Trust and distrust.....................................................................................................85 Physiological evidence of trust................................................................................87 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ORGANISATIONAL PRAXIS.....................................................89 Repairing trust relationships...................................................................................89 Maintaining and enhancing trust.....................................................................93 Organisation-level trust repair.........................................................................95 Enhancing trust in organisations – the role of presumptive trust...................95 Enhance or increase trust levels by means of information sharing.................97 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................... 99 Chapter 6: Engagement in diverse workspaces: An African and international application by Rica Viljoen.....................................................................................101

iii

INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................101 MULTI-CULTURAL APPROACHES FOR CONSIDERATION.................................................101 Introduction...........................................................................................................101 Hofstede................................................................................................................102 The Globe studies..................................................................................................103 Trompenaars..........................................................................................................103 Human niches/spiral dynamics..............................................................................104 Introduction...................................................................................................104 The different human niches...........................................................................105 Engagement and human niches....................................................................108 Conclusion.............................................................................................................109 A MULTI-CULTURAL SENSITIVE MEASUREMENT OF ENGAGEMENT..............................109 Introduction...........................................................................................................109 The focus of the BeQ.............................................................................................110 Human niches and the BeQ...................................................................................110 The BeQ methodology – practical considerations.................................................111 I-ENGAGE, WE-ENGAGE, THEY-ENGAGE and TRANS-ENGAGE......................................111 Benefits of the BeQ philosophy.............................................................................116 Conclusion.............................................................................................................116 ENGAGEMENT DYNAMICS IN AFRICA............................................................................116 Introduction...........................................................................................................116 Doing business in Tanzania....................................................................................117 Doing business in Ghana.......................................................................................120 Conclusion.............................................................................................................120 ENGAGEMENT DYNAMICS IN OTHER COUNTRIES.........................................................120 Australia.................................................................................................................120 China......................................................................................................................125 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................. 126 Chapter 7: Engagement – The critical prerequisite for co-determination by Rica Viljoen.......................................................................................................127 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................127 THE CONCEPT OF CO-DETERMINATION........................................................................128 Introduction and background................................................................................128 Objectives of co-determination.............................................................................128 The benefits of co-determination..........................................................................130 SOUTH AFRICA EXPERIENCE OF CO-DETERMINATION..................................................131 Background............................................................................................................131 Why co-determination failed in South Africa........................................................133

iv

THE STORY OF INTERSTATE BUS LINES (IBL)...................................................................135 Where it started....................................................................................................135 Organisational change and development interventions........................................137 Engagement studies in Interstate Bus Lines..........................................................137 Inclusive engagement strategy..............................................................................139 Internal HR initiatives............................................................................................141 A new management team.............................................................................142 Increase in engagement........................................................................................143 The 2016 strategic plan.........................................................................................145 Empowerment in Interstate Bus Lines...................................................................146 Where IBL is today.................................................................................................149 Insights gained on co-determination.............................................................149 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................. 150 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................. 151 ENDNOTES.....................................................................................................................174 INDEX............................................................................................................................. 184

v

ABOUT THE EDITORS Prof Hester Nienaber Hester Nienaber holds the qualifications DCom (Strategic Marketing, The University of South Africa (Unisa)); MBA, University of Pretoria; BCom (Hons) (Business Management), University of Pretoria; BCom (Marketing Management), University of Pretoria; Certified ROI Practitioner, ROI Institute; ASTD Certificate in Human Performance Improvement, RAU (now UJ); Certificate In Group Process Consultation and Facilitation, Unisa; IEB Certificate in Assessment; and the IEB Certificate in Moderation. Currently Hester fulfils the role of Research Professor, Safety Management in the Department of Operations Management at Unisa. In essence Hester’s research, whether on her own, with colleagues (national and international) or with students, focuses on strategy, the means to achieve organisational goals. To be effective strategy should be based on competitive advantage, which has three dimensions: the arena where the organisation chooses to compete, customer value and the resources (in a broad sense) to offer value to customers in the chosen arenas. Human resources are of particular importance in achieving competitive advantage. Hence, her research theme is “shaping competitiveness by developing human capital” (strategy implementation; talent management and engagement). Hester regularly moderates for the University of Pretoria, the University of Johannesburg and Tshwane University of Technology. Hester also reviews papers for national and international journals and conferences. Previously Hester lectured in strategic management and research methods to Master’s students. Hester has 30 years’ experience as a management scientist in both the public and private sectors. As a management scientist, Hester primarily conducted industry analysis and was involved in the analysis, design, development, delivery, evaluation and impact assessment of interventions. Hester is the recipient of a number of awards, including the Unisa Excellence in Tuition Award 2010, and the EmeraldLiteratiNetwork 2011 Outstanding Paper Award. Hester is a member of the CIPD and currently a NRF-rated researcher.

Research interests General management, strategic management, strategy, competitive advantage (dimension resources, in particular human resources and talent management and engagement), strategy implementation failure.

Prof Nico Martins Nico holds a PhD in Industrial Psychology and is registered with the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) as a psychologist and as a chartered HR practitioner with the South Africa Board for People Practices (SABPP). His MCom dissertation focused on organisational communication and his Doctorate on organisational culture. His initial vi

research in organisational culture formed the basis for research in related areas such as organisational climate, organisational trust, employee engagement and information security culture. Over and above his own research, a number of his Master’s and Doctorate students have conducted further research in organisational culture focusing on the assessment of subcultures, the relationship between organisational culture and concepts such as organisational commitment, employee satisfaction, perceived leader emotional competency, personality type, occupational health and work engagement. The collaborative research has led to the validation of assessment tools in organisational culture, organisational climate, organisational trust, employee engagement and employment equity. He has attended several specialised programmes in the field at the National Training Laboratories (NTL) in the United States of America and is an international affiliate of the American Society of Industrial and Organisational Psychology (SIOP). Prof Martins previously worked for Bankorp and Sasol in various human resources management specialist positions. These include Human Resources Manager, Training Manager, Head: Personnel Development and Manager: Development and Personnel Research. At present he is with the Department of Industrial Psychology at Unisa and specialises in the field of organisational psychology. His fields of expertise are organisational development and change. He currently lectures in the following modules in the department: Organisational Development and Change (Doctoral degree in Consulting Psychology) Organisational Performance and Assessment of Interventions (Doctoral degree in Consulting Psychology) Organisational Psychology (Master’s degree) Prof Martins currently supervises 14 doctoral and 11 Master’s students. He also moderates for the Universities of KwaZulu-Natal, Stellenbosch and Johannesburg on a regular basis. He is acknowledged by the National Research Foundation (NRF) as a seasonal researcher (level C) and as one of the few people in South Africa researching the topic of subcultures and their measurement. Formerly the Head of the Centre for Industrial and Organisational Psychology, Unisa, from 2002 to 2007, Prof Martins now coordinates the Applied Programme in Organisational Development at the Centre. Articles Prof Martins has published have dealt with organisational culture and climate, organisational diagnoses, employment equity, organisational trust and affirmative action. He has presented papers at more than 49 national and international conferences, based on work done at various national and

vii

international companies. He has participated in about 500 reports on various aspects of organisational diagnoses, and has extensive knowledge of the fields of organisational assessment, (re)design and interventions. His research focuses on quantitative and qualitative research. Conducting teambuilding for organisations, focusing on Belbin team roles, is also part of Prof Martins’ portfolio.

viii

ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS Abigail Moshoeu Abigail Moshoeu (MA) is currently studying for her DLitt et Phil in the Department of Industrial and Organisational Psychology at Unisa. She is currently employed as a researcher in the Bureau of Market Research (BMR) at the same university. Her primary research interest is in the field of Organisational Psychology with a special focus on employee engagement and work-life balance. In addition, she has been involved in numerous research projects with the BMR for the past 15 years.

Dr Rica Viljoen Rica Viljoen’s research, teaching and service activities reflect her interest in multinational leadership, inclusivity, OCD and sustainability. Her research has been published and presented internationally, and reached more than 42 countries. She is head of the Department of the Management of People Faculty of the Da Vinci Institute for Innovation and Technology. Rica is a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Johannesburg. As a master OCD practitioner she focuses on large-scale organisational change and development. She is the managing director of Mandala Consulting, a niche organisational change and development company that specialises in transformational processes, organisational research and spiral dynamics. Rica’s corporate career was in banking, where she held an executive organisational change and development role. She is accredited by numerous professional bodies such as the South African Board of People Practices (SABPP), the Institute for People Management (IPM), the Institute for Management Consultants South Africa (IMCSA) and the American Psychological Association Division 13 (APA). She worked closely with Dr Loraine Laubscher on integrating African spiritual consciousness with mainstream scholarship. Together with Professors Ronnie Lessem and Alexander Schieffer she started the Mandala Centre for integral research. She recently published a textbook, Inclusive Organisational Transformation, through Ashgate Publishers.

Dr Hartmut von der Ohe Hartmut von der Ohe is a registered industrial psychologist who started his career as a researcher and organisational consultant before joining Unisa, where he is currently the manager of the Centre for Industrial and Organisational Psychology in the School of Management Sciences, and a senior lecturer in the Department of Industrial and Organisational Psychology. As course co-ordinator he teaches personnel psychology at undergraduate and postgraduate level. Hartmut is also involved in the fields

ix

of organisational development, ergonomics, health and safety and psychological assessment, either as a course co-ordinator or as a subject-matter advisor. His current interest is in the application of neuro-sciences and their link to organisational behaviours (such as trust). He completed his undergraduate studies and his Honours and Master’s degrees at the University of Pretoria (all cum laude). Thereafter he received his PhD in Industrial and Organisational Psychology from Unisa. He has published mainly in the fields of personnel psychology and organisational psychology, especially in the field of organisational trust. Most of these publications emanate from corporate consulting projects in an attempt to balance academic rigour with practical relevance.

x

FOREWORD by Holly Schiffrin The benefits of employment engagement to both the employee and the company are unequivocal: higher job satisfaction, more productivity, lower turnover, greater customer satisfaction, and higher profit. An engaged employee seems to be one of the most valuable resources an organisation can have to ensure its sustainability. The question is how to achieve it. The answer to that question is the focus of this book, which describes how the complex interactions of an individual with his or her work environment contribute to employee engagement within a cultural context. In the spirit of full disclosure, I must confess that my background and training is developmental psychology not business. However, I have published on many of the concepts cited in this book as they relate to parenting and wellbeing. While reading about employee engagement, I was struck by the remarkable similarities between the development of the child and the development of an organisation. Urie Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory immediately came to mind. Bronfenbrenner revolutionised the way psychologists think about how children develop by shifting from a singular focus on the individual to the complex interactions between individuals and their environments. He proposed that children’s individual genetic predispositions are only part of the story; their development is also impacted by interactions with their caregivers (eg microsystem), the interactions of their caregivers with each other (ie mesosystem), the intermediate environmental influences such as their parent’s workplace (ie exosystem), as well as the broader values of the surrounding culture (ie macrosystem). The ecological systems model was highly influential in transforming how intervention services were provided to children, resulting in programmes such as Head Start that recognised the importance of intervening in the child’s home environment to maximise development. In other words, it’s not enough to change the child; you need to change the whole system of influences to have a lasting impact. Bronfenbrenner’s model of child development maps extremely well onto the concepts of organisational development discussed in this book. The authors describe factors at all levels of the model that influence employee engagement, and argue that any organisational intervention must be tailored to both the individual and environmental factors affecting each unique organisation to ensure sustainable change. Several chapters address individual differences in people’s characteristics that may be associated with their level of engagement at work. In chapter 1, Moshoeu describes the physical, emotional, and cognitive elements of engagement that are specific to the individual suggesting that people who are more resilient, optimistic and self-efficacious are often more engaged. Both Moshoeu and Nienaber (chapter 2) describe the

xi

importance of intrinsic motivation to employee engagement. People are intrinsically motivated to do something when they find it inherently motivating (as opposed to working for a paycheque). Self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000) has identified three major factors that increase intrinsic motivation: when people feel autonomous in making their own decisions, when they feel competent to perform the task before them, and when they feel related to other people (more on this below). In chapter 2, Nienaber also suggests that workers are more engaged when they feel safe, are able to see how their work contributes to the goals of the organisation and view their work as meaningful. Martins provides a thorough review of the literature on numerous individual characteristics that impact engagement in chapter 4 (see table 4.1). In addition to individual differences, many chapters describe how the interactions of the individual with others in their work environment (ie the microsystem) impact employee engagement. Chapter 1 addresses the interaction of the person with the job demands and resources of their work environment; too many demands and/or two few resources can negatively impact engagement. Both Moshoeu and Nienaber describe the importance of relationships with others, including social support from co-workers as well as feedback and support from supervisors, as some of the key factors driving employee engagement. In chapter 5, Von der Ohe also discusses the development of trust between employees and their supervisors as an important element. People who trust their coworkers, supervisors and the company are more likely to be highly engaged. Social support and trust might both be thought of as necessary components of the relatedness concept that is essential to self-determination. Both Nienaber and Von der Ohe also discuss the interactions between supervisors and management/management practices (ie mesosystem) that can affect the ability of the employee to feel autonomy, respect and trust, which, in turn, increase engagement. These three variables, respectively, parallel self-determination theory’s concepts of autonomy, competence and relatedness previously identified as critical to engagement. In the final chapter, Viljoen goes a step further than people’s need for self-determination and emphasises the importance of codetermination of decisions between the employee and the organisation for increasing engagement. She describes the successful application of the German model of codetermination in a specific South African organisation that can serve as a model for other businesses to follow to increase their employee engagement and achieve sustainability. In terms of the broader environmental contexts, several chapters address issues at the cultural level that might impact employee engagement as well as how to define and measure employee engagement in a culturally sensitive manner. In chapter 3, Viljoen introduces the concept of “over-culture,” which includes political, economic, legislative, social and environmental influences and closely parallels Bronfenbrenner’s conceptualisation of the macrosystem. She emphasises the importance of including all major stakeholders in the process of assessment and implementation of any organisational change intervention. Ultimately, she offers the Benchmark of Engagement xii

Questionnaire (BeQ) as a model for studying organisations that is sensitive to the surrounding cultural context. In chapter 4, Martins reports survey results describing the current state of employment engagement within the cultural context of South Africa, providing a roadmap of which elements of engagement to target for future intervention. Finally, Viljoen details several case studies in chapter 6 thus, providing examples of how problems with employee engagement have been identified and rectified through culturally sensitive assessment and intervention that should serve as useful models for others to follow in their quest to improve employee engagement in South Africa and elsewhere. If employee engagement were considered solely an isolated characteristic of an individual, a great opportunity for organisational change would be lost. By identifying the multiple systems (ie individual characteristics, interpersonal relationships and cultural context) that influence employee engagement and organisational sustainability, this book has the potential to transform organisational change in the same way that Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory revolutionised early intervention practices in childhood. Holly H Schiffrin, PhD Associate Professor of Psychological Science Author of Balancing the big stuff: Finding happiness in work, family, and life

xiii

INTRODUCTION Contextualisation The ultimate goal of an organisation is long-term survival and growth, otherwise known as sustainability. Sustainable organisations give effect to/fulfil their purpose, namely providing products and services needed and wanted by customers, employment and wealth creation, in a way that preserves the environment and benefits society. Strategy is the tool management uses to ensure sustainability. Effective strategy is based on “competitive advantage”, something the organisation does better than the competition in attracting customers on the basis of value offered. Human resources (HR) (in other words employees) are critical to competitive advantage, in particular for the knowledge, skills, experience and attitudes they bring to the workplace. Knowledge, skills, experience and attitudes are open to change, owing to changes in the workplace (environment). The lack of resources is regularly cited as one of the main reasons for the failure of strategy implementation. Usually talent management receives top priority, because skilled HR are in short supply; however it was realised recently that engaged employees are equally important. In 2013 respondents to the Bain & Company global management tool survey indicated employee engagement was a new tool they used and it was the third most frequently used tool, after strategic planning and customer relationship management, to manage organisational performance. Different explanations are given for employee engagement and they are accompanied by different measurement scales. Most of these scales were developed in different contexts, which have a bearing on the reliability and validity of the measurement and consequently on the effectiveness of interventions proposed to improve employee engagement. Authors lament that most often-used measurement scales lack reliability and validity.

The need for, purpose of and audience for a South African book on employee engagement Given the importance of engagement, the novelty of these concepts, and the different definitions and measurements, some of which lack reliability and validity, this book serves to clarify the concept of engagement. We hope this clarification will assist readers to make informed choices about the treatment of engagement, including measuring how to (optimally) benefit from engagement efforts and thus improve organisational performance and sustainability, especially in view of the fact that Africa is considered a continent of opportunity. The book is aimed at practitioners, but academics and students alike will benefit from it. xiv

Structure of the book To make the book easy to use, each chapter stands alone, written in the voice of the author. The chapters can thus be read in any order. We provide brief details of the chapters (as they are presented), to enable you to choose which ones to read (first). Chapter 1 is about the construct of “engagement”, conceived as the hottest topic at present and a key business driver for organisational success. Given the changing world of employment, globalisation, rapidly changing technologies and battles for talent, it is imperative for organisations to seek ways that can foster engagement in the workplace. Employee engagement is one of the key strategies that organisations could cultivate to attract, motivate and retain a highly skilled, flexible and adaptive workforce necessary for growth and sustainability of the organisations. Furthermore, employee engagement is about the physical (hand), emotional (heart), and cognitive (head) skills that sustain role-related tasks to accomplish organisational work activities. Strategy and engagement is the focus of chapter 2, which shows that engaged employees underpin a successful strategy, the tool organisations use to achieve their goals. Employees choose the degree to which they engage with their job, team and organisation based on a number of factors, including whether they can see how they contribute to achieving the goals of the organisation. This is based on their perception of the meaningfulness and significance of the job at hand and the safety of the environment in which it is performed, among other things. In this regard the CEO and leadership down the line play a crucial role. Chapter 3 addresses engagement in multi-cultural settings. The importance of constructbased engagement assessments, a scientific approach to organisational research and the integration of cultural dynamics in engagement studies are highlighted. The author emphasises the importance of truly hearing the voices of participants and the critical prerequisite of involving the leader from the start of an engagement study. Diversity factors that are not always incorporated in engagement studies, such as gender and power politics, are considered. The concept of inclusivity as a research philosophy is introduced and applied to data gathering and analysis. Ethical considerations are considered. Ultimately, engagement is positioned as human energy to perform in the system. The multi-cultural properties of the Benchmark of Engagement Questionnaire (BeQ) are discussed. The chapter concludes with a section of practical advice on conducting a BeQ study, and design principles of a multi-cultural BeQ session. A number of definitions, models and measures are used to measure engagement. In chapter 4 the focus is on the development of a South African measurement tool. The results of three measurements and the tendencies emerging from these assessments are discussed. With the diverse South African environment it is not always appropriate to merely draw conclusions from overall survey results. The results of some biographical and sector groups are discussed to provide a more in-depth view of the role of employee xv

engagement. The chapter concludes with some recommendations on the management and improvement of employee engagement. In chapter 5 the connection between engagement and trust, which is often felt intuitively, is articulated from a scientific viewpoint. First, the concept of trust is defined and then the reader is introduced to models of trust, with the emphasis on the North American Mayer et al. (1995) model and South African Martins (2000) model and how they can be integrated conceptually into a unified trust model. After this theoretical foundation the attention turns to practical workplace issues such as trust in leadership, which often exposes the dark side of trust and distrust. Lastly, recommendations for organisational praxis, concerning repairing, maintaining and enhancing trust relationships, are made. On an organisational level the role of presumptive trust and information-sharing in enhancing trust levels and engagement is discussed. “Reflections and theoretical development – case studies” is the topic of chapter 6. In this chapter, the author describes how engagement manifests in multi-cultural settings and offers different ways of describing the national culture (or as it is referred to here, the “over-culture)”. Spiral dynamics or human niche theory, which describes various worldviews or archetypes in thinking systems, is introduced. An understanding of how these thinking systems or human niches are incorporated is positioned as a unique way to study engagement in multi-cultural settings. The importance of using multi-culturally sensitive instruments, like the BeQ, to conduct this type of study is highlighted. Examples of how the BeQ approach was followed in Tanzania and Ghana, as East and West African countries, are shared. In addition, insights gained about the over-culture of Australia and China are presented. In the final chapter, “Engagement – the critical prerequisite for co-determination”, Rica Viljoen illustrates the successful turnaround of Interstate Bus Lines (IBL) by applying the BeQ philosophy. This chapter shows practically how engagement and trust are related and are fostered in applying a scientific approach to enhancing engagement in a real organisation. Engagement is often studied in the context of the organisational climate. Here, the benefits of engagement translate into capacity in IBL to embark on and purposefully implement co-determination – an alternative employee relation strategy that can only succeed if the culture of the organisation is conducive to trust. We hope that this book will deliver on its promise of being useful in understanding engagement, while making a positive contribution to enhanced engagement and thus improved organisational performance to the benefit of the employees, organisations and wider society.

xvi

Chapter 1 Theoretical framework for employee engagement by Abigail Moshoeu

INTRODUCTION The construct of “engagement” emerged as a result of the positive psychology movement in the late 1990s, with a renewed emphasis on what is considered appropriate for people compared to the old emphasis on traditional psychological research. For many years, traditional psychology has been particularly interested in understanding illness and dysfunctional models of people and the wrongness of people1 and has thus ignored human strength and optimal functioning. Evidence of such illness and dysfunction is visible in the number of publications on negative states, which outnumbers the number on positive states.2 Traditional psychological research, however, has been ignorant of three fundamental roles: those of curing mental illness, helping healthy people achieve happiness and productive lives and actualise their full potential. It has thus concentrated on the negative consequences and burnout.3 The positive psychology movement is an attempt to focus on human strengths, motives, capacities and optimal functioning that are realised within the field of psychology,4 which are distinct from the weakness and malfunctioning envisaged in the burnout studies. The movement is primarily based on redirecting psychological research towards the neglected aspects of helping healthy people achieve happiness and productive lives and realise their full potential. Positive psychology and organisational theory merge in the new approach of positive organisational behaviour (POB), defined as “the study and application of positively oriented HR strengths and psychological capacities that can be measured, developed, and effectively managed for performance improvement in today’s workplace”.5 The focus on positive psychology provides individuals with the opportunity to thrive rather than merely survive. It shifts emphasis onto building and strengthening human potential instead of concentrating on fixing and repairing. Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi6 note that a psychology focused on positive subjective experiences, individual experiences and group experiences is bound to improve individuals’ quality of life and prevent pathology. The subjective level concerns the value of subjective experiences such as wellbeing and satisfaction in past experiences, hope and optimism in future experiences, and flow and happiness in present experiences.

1

Employee engagement in a South African context

Therefore, the interest in engagement became a focus of study with the mounting popularity of the positive movement in organisational behaviour and the emphasis on promoting affirmative psychological states rather than merely preventing negative ones. The concept of engagement resonates with the area of POB aimed at enhancing wellbeing at work.7 Luthans and Youssef define POB as “the study and application of positively orientated HR strengths and psychological capacities that can be measured, developed, and effectively managed for performance improvement in today’s workplace.”8 Despite the focus on positive psychological movement, employee engagement also emerges as a result of organisations’ need to strive to achieve exceptional performance and outperform the competition, brought about by globalisation and increasingly competitive business environments. The search for human capital is a crucial strategy for any organisation to gain its competitive edge in the rapidly changing business environment, purely because of the knowledge, skills and abilities possessed by individual employees. Botha and Mostert are of the opinion that human capital is essential in any organisation, and thus it is imperative to develop employees in order to optimise performance to achieve a competitive advantage.9 Engagement has been the focus of theoretical debate for decades, given its association with POB.10 Numerous studies have linked employee engagement with an array of favourable organisational outcomes such as increased productivity, organisational commitment, organisational citizenship behaviour (OCB), job satisfaction, customer satisfaction and reduced intention to resign and accidents.11 For these reasons employee engagement gained popularity with both practitioners and academic researchers and has attracted much attention since 1990.12 In particular, the focus is on human strengths, optimal functioning and positive experiences at work.13 It is noteworthy that academic researchers have been particularly interested in how to enhance the motivation and wellbeing of employees,14 which in turn predicts organisational performance.15 Its appeal is linked to the notion that engaged employees are better performers, and therefore more likely to drive organisational success. The structure of this chapter is as follows. The first section presents the conceptualisation of engagement as represented by practitioners and academic perspectives. Understanding the different conceptions of engagement will enable both practitioners and academic researchers to predict why some employees identify psychologically with their jobs. The second section presents the essential theoretical framework underpinning the engagement construct, and the organisational outcomes of engagement are elucidated. The chapter ends with general conclusions and a look at the future of this intriguing psychological state.

2

Chapter 1: Theoretical framework for employee engagement

CONCEPTUALISATION OF ENGAGEMENT FROM PRACTITIONERS AND ACADEMICS Engagement has been defined in many different ways and has attracted much empirical research, yet no agreement has been reached on its precise meaning.16 Previous studies have mentioned that the conceptualisation and operationalisation of engagement lack consistency in their application across different fields,17 despite the proliferation of research undertaken on the subject. However, this elicits a great deal of confusion about the meaning of “engagement” relative to existing constructs such as job satisfaction, organisational commitment and job involvement.18 Complementary studies also describe engagement as a “slippery slope”19 and different reasons are advanced for its elusiveness.20 Specifically, previous studies have conceptualised and operationalised the concept of engagement differently, and there is also disagreement on the exact dimensions inherent in engagement. Nienaber and Martins21 also confirm that different studies have treated engagement differently, resulting in different outcomes that are not coherent. Other studies consider engagement as a repackaging of well-known constructs such as job satisfaction, organisational commitment, OCB and job involvement,22 and others advocate its uniqueness and distinctiveness.23 Quite a few studies have associated engagement with organisational outcomes such as productivity and customer loyalty.24 Despite a surge of interest in improving engagement, there is still some disagreement as to what employee engagement entails, how to go about getting it, and what it looks like when it is achieved. The literature review in this book positions engagement within two different approaches, namely that of practitioners and that of academics, and presents the enormous confusions within the discipline. This confusion is further complicated by the misuse of the words “work engagement” or “employee engagement”. The concept of employee engagement has been defined in many different ways, to the extent that various studies often use the concept interchangeably with work engagement,25 though the concepts represent two distinct things. For example, employee engagement is referred to as “individual’s involvement and satisfaction and enthusiasm for work”26 whereas work engagement is a multi-dimensional affective–cognitive measure of wellbeing.27 Interestingly, the term ‘‘employee engagement’’ is more popular among practitioners and includes the relationship between employees’ occupational roles and their organisation. It is a concept coined by the Gallup Research Group,28 which initiated the construct with the intention of creating a measure of the workplace that was comparable across different organisations. Nienaber and Martins29 note that the construct and its

3

Employee engagement in a South African context

measurement are not yet fully developed, resulting in divergences in the meaning of “employee engagement” compared to “work engagement”. This view is also supported by Macey and Schneider,30 who state that the academic understanding of engagement is still relatively new compared to much of the research being provided by practitioners. This presents academic research with a significant opportunity to debate the issues relating to employee engagement. By contrast, ‘‘work engagement’’ is the preferred concept used by academics because of the focus on the relationships employees have with their work activities.31 It is defined as a combination of three aspects: vigour, dedication and absorption. It captures how employees experience their work as stimulating and energetic and something to which they really want to devote time and effort (vigour); as a significant and meaningful pursuit (dedication); and as engrossing and interesting (absorption). Macey and Schneider assert that while the concept “employee engagement” has grown significantly in terms of definition and measurement, empirical research on the concept within the academic approach has lagged behind.32 The academic approach to engagement is primarily focused on defining and validating the psychological concept at the micro or individual level to better understand factors that promote engagement and disengagement.33 These approaches are discussed in greater detail in the section to follow.

Business approaches to engagement With practitioners, engagement has most often been defined as emotional and intellectual commitment to the organisation or the amount of discretionary effort exhibited by employees in their work roles. It is not surprising that numerous studies associate engagement with one or more of the A-factors (commitment, job satisfaction, job involvement and OCB). May, Gilson and Harter34 conceptualise engagement by emphasising the importance of people bringing their physical, emotional and cognitive resources to bear on role-related tasks when they engage themselves at work. They argue that most jobs entail some level of physical exertion and challenge, and emotional exhaustion and cognitive demands, varying by job and person. According to May et al.,35 the construct of engagement is closely associated with constructs such as “job involvement” and “flow”. Job involvement entails a cognitive state and that refers to the centrality of a job to an individual (and his or her identity). Engagement is regarded as an antecedent to job involvement. May et al.36 consider flow as cognitive involvement with an activity, whereas work engagement includes cognitive, emotional and physical aspects.

4

Chapter 1: Theoretical framework for employee engagement

Roberts and Davenport37 define work engagement as a person’s involvement in his or her job. Individuals who are highly engaged in their jobs identify personally with the job and are motivated by the work itself. They tend to work harder and more productively than others and are more likely to produce the results their customers and organisations want. Engaged employees report that their jobs make good use of their skills and abilities, are challenging and stimulating, and provide them with a sense of personal accomplishment.

Academic approaches to engagement The literature on engagement shows a variety of approaches by both practitioners and the academic perspectives that portray the states of employee engagement. The following section discusses the states of employee engagement from the academic perspective. Need-satisfying approach: Kahn38 is considered by many as the founder of engagement in the academic perspective.39 Kahn40 conceptualises personal engagement as “the simultaneous employment and expression of a person’s ‘preferred self’ in task behaviours that promote connections to work and to others, personal presence, and active full role performance”. This simply implies that engagement is a state where individuals express themselves with others at group levels through their work role. He describes engagement as a multi-dimensional construct, in the sense that employees are emotionally, cognitively or physically engaged in their work activities. By contrast, Kahn41 describes personal disengagement as the decoupling of the self from the work and withdrawal of oneself physically, cognitively and emotionally during role performance. Olivier and Rothmann42 also consider personal disengagement as someone being detached from work, and then hiding their true identity, thoughts and feelings when performing role activities. The disengaged person has a tendency to withdraw from his or her role activities and thus begins to defend the self by merely disconnecting themselves physically, cognitively and emotionally, resulting in acts of incompetence. Quite significant studies have explored the determinants of three psychological conditions (meaningfulness, safety and availability), and reported their contribution to engagement in the work activity. For instance, May et al. and Rich et al.43 expand the theoretical framework of Kahn44 and also test the three psychological conditions. May et al.45 emphasise the importance of people using their physical, emotional and cognitive resources, which sustain role-related tasks, when they engage themselves in work. Rich et al.,46 on the other hand, point to the fact that engagement is a “multidimensional motivational concept which reflects the simultaneous investment of an individual’s physical, cognitive and emotional energy in active work performance”.

5

Employee engagement in a South African context

Burnout-antithesis approaches: These approaches contextualise engagement from two different but related perspectives. The first perspective considers engagement as the opposite or positive antithesis of burnout. Specifically, engagement is characterised by energy, involvement and efficacy, which are the direct opposites of the three burnout dimensions, namely exhaustion, cynicism and inefficacy.47 When employees are engaged they are thought to possess a sense of energetic and effective connection with their work activities (energy, involvement) and see themselves as able to deal with the demands of their work (professional efficacy).48 It suggests that higher levels of engagement inevitably represent lower levels of burnout. The alternative perspectives consider engagement as a distinct concept that is negatively related to burnout.49 They argue that engagement cannot be operationalised by the opposite profile of burnout, namely the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) scores, but should rather be assessed in its own right (independently with different instruments). They define engagement as a “positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind characterised by vigour, dedication and absorption”,50 and maintain that engagement should be operationalised in its own right and independently from other different instruments. Bakker and Demerouti51 maintain that engaged employees are not superhuman nor are they addicted to their work, given that they do feel tired after a long day of hard work, and these authors state that such employees ascribe their tiredness to positive accomplishments. In practice, however, it is likely that burnout and engagement are substantively negatively correlated. This implies it is impractical to suggest that when an employee is not burned out, it necessarily means that he or she is engaged in work roles. On the other hand, when an employee is low on engagement, it does not necessarily entail that he or she is burned out. This clearly shows that the relationship between both constructs cannot be empirically studied when they are measured with the same instruments. The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) is used as the preferred measurement based on extensive empirical research studies that have shown its psychometric properties to assess engagement. The instrument was initially developed and validated by Schaufeli and Bakker52 and relied on a self-report questionnaire that captures the vigour (energy), enthusiasm (dedication) and involvement (absorption) that are regarded as central features of the construct of employee engagement. Compared to needs satisfaction, the UWES refers to work engagement rather than personal engagement and proposes that engaged employees are likely to perform better than their disengaged colleagues.53 Satisfaction-engagement approach: Harter et al.54 describe employee engagement against the background of the empirical studies conducted by the Gallup Research Group. For them, engagement only occurs when individuals are emotionally connected to others and cognitively vigilant; it is understood to be “the individual’s involvement and 6

Chapter 1: Theoretical framework for employee engagement

satisfaction and enthusiasm with work activities”.55 In this sense, the term “employee engagement” is better captured by the construct. Although the definition overlaps with other well-known constructs, Harter et al.56 claim that effective engagement should occur on a regular day-to-day basis, and be actively applied in people’s work behaviour. The Gallup Workplace Audit, which consists of 12 items, was generally used to measure employee engagement. Harter et al.57 provide empirical evidence that reveals a large portion of the variance in overall job satisfaction and the antecedents of personal job satisfaction and other affective constructs. In their meta-analysis of over 7  939 business units in 36 companies, they found a significant relationship between employee engagement and improvements in customer satisfaction, productivity, profits, turnover and safety records. Multidimensional approach: Saks58 defines employee engagement as the extent to which an individual is attentive and absorbed in the performance of his or her roles.59 He also considers employee engagement “a distinct and unique construct consisting of cognitive, emotional and behavioural components that are associated with individual’s role performance”.60 This definition is consistent with other previous studies61 because of its emphasis on role performance at work and alignment with the social exchange theory. Saks was the first researcher to actually distinguish between two types of employee engagement, namely job engagement (performing the work role) and organisational engagement (performing the role as a member of the organisation), suggesting that employee engagement can have multiple foci, similar to organisational commitment. Tri-dimensional framework of engagement: Macey and Schneider62 developed a tridimensional framework for understanding the various components inherent in the meaning of engagement. They consider employee engagement as encapsulating state (satisfaction, involvement, commitment), trait (conscientiousness, proactive personality) and behavioural engagement (extra-role behaviour, proactivity), which in turn resemble affective energy and discretionary effort directed to one’s work and organisation.63 Macey and Schneider define employee engagement by suggesting “that job design attributes … directly affect traits engagement, the presence of a transformational leader … directly affects state engagement and the presence of a transformational leader … directly affects trust levels and thus indirectly affects behavioural engagement”.64 They present engagement as a complex concept related to, but distinguishable from, other well-established constructs in the academic literature. In summary, it appears to be a common understanding that in fact engagement is a positive state of mind. However, the definition and meaning of engagement in the practitioner literature often overlaps with other constructs that lack construct validity. Within the academic literature it has been defined as a distinct and unique construct that consists of cognitive, emotional and behavioural components that are associated with individual role performance. Furthermore, engagement is distinguishable from several 7

Employee engagement in a South African context

related constructs, most notably organisational commitment, OCB and job involvement. Based on the various definitions offered, Coetzee and Rothmann consider engagement as characterised by energy, involvement and efficacy.65 This implies that engaged employees have a sense of energetic and effective connection with their work activities, and they generate their own positive feedback and encourage themselves in their work role even in difficult situations. Engaged employees become physically involved in their tasks, cognitively alert and emotionally connected to others when performing their jobs. On the contrary, disengaged employees become disconnected from their jobs and hide their true identity, thoughts and feelings during role performances.66 Understanding the psychological processes that explain how engaged employees stay engaged contributes to the theoretical advancement of the employee engagement concept, but also provides useful insights for sustaining or creating flourishing workforces. The next section discusses the theoretical frameworks underpinning employee engagement.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS UNDERPINNING ENGAGEMENT Over the years, the concept of engagement has been contextualised from a number of theoretical frameworks that emphasise different aspects that cannot be integrated into one overarching conceptual model.

Kahn’s (1990) psychological conditions Kahn (1990) conducted an ethnographic study among counsellors in a summer camp, and employees of architecture firms, where he was a participant and observer and outside researcher respectively, to analyse moments of individual engagement and disengagement. He defined personal engagement as “the harnessing of organisation members’ selves to their work roles by which they employ and express themselves physically, cognitively and emotionally during role performances”.67 Simpson also considers personal engagement as inclusive of physically, cognitively and emotionally employing or articulating oneself during work role performances. Therefore, an engaged person is considered to be someone who is able to keep his or her preferred self within the role, thereby infusing personal energy into role behaviours and expressing the self through role performance.68 Kahn69 describes engagement as a multi-dimensional construct, in the sense that employees are emotionally, cognitively or physically engaged in their work activities. Therefore, the more engaged they are in each dimension, the higher their overall personal engagement in work activities.

8

Chapter 1: Theoretical framework for employee engagement

Kahn’s70 grounded theory of engagement is based on three psychological conditions, namely meaningfulness, safety and availability. The psychological conditions describe the experiential conditions whose presence represents personal engagement and whose absence influences someone to personally disengage. Shuck et al. posit that the determination of engagement lies with the fulfilment of the three conditions.71 Therefore, failure to exhibit any of the three psychological conditions connotes that a person is disengaged.

Psychological meaningfulness Psychological meaningfulness has been classified as the most important psychological state of working because it captures the fundamental reasons behind why people seek employment. It attaches a significant meaning to the work roles in relation to an individual motive of wanting to work, which to a greater extent facilitates personal growth and work motivation. Rothmann and Welsh72 explicitly state that employment is one area that provides people with a sense of meaning, merely because of the total number of hours people spend at work compared to at home. Roughly, people spend on average of 10 hours commuting and working on a daily basis for various reasons such as fulfilling personal growth and as a calling. That is, employees prefer to engage with work that has meaning and is an extension of their personalities and dreams. Psychological meaningfulness is also associated with a sense of return on investment in work role performances,73 such as feeling useful and valuable, and is influenced by job characteristics such as variety, learning opportunities and autonomy, work–role fit and rewarding interpersonal interactions with co-workers. Lack of meaningfulness in employees’ work activities can be symbolic of disengagement.74

Psychological safety Psychological safety is described as a feeling of being able to safely engage oneself without fear of negative consequences to self-image, status and career at work.75 Generally speaking, people feel safer in situations where they perceive they will not be harmed when expressing their true selves at work. For instance, supportive and trustworthy supervisor and colleague relationships are most likely to promote feelings of psychological safety at work. According to May et al.,76 unsafe conditions exist when individual employees find themselves in situations that are ambiguous, unpredictable and threatening. Kahn states that “situations promoting trust are predictable, consistent, clear, and nonthreatening, people were able to understand the boundaries between what was allowed and disallowed and the potential consequences of their behaviours”.77

9

Employee engagement in a South African context

Psychological availability Psychological availability is defined as a sense of possessing the physical, emotional and psychological resources needed to engage the self at work.78 Psychological availability is described as the level of competency inherent in an individual’s readiness to engage, and is influenced primarily by the distractions associated with operating as a member of social systems. According to Hakanen, Schaufeli and Ahola79 job-related resources signify the major determinants of psychological availability. That is, the availability of resources increases employees’ confidence in engaging in the assigned tasks. In addition, Bakker and Demerouti80 maintain that resources are necessary to deal with demands at work so that employees can become engaged; they also promote psychological availability. Kahn points out that issues in people’s lives outside of work “leave them more or less available for investments of self during role performances”.81 Factors that may influence psychological availability include the individual’s resources, work-role insecurities and outside activities.82

Empirical validation of psychological conditions A considerable number of studies have been conducted to test the three psychological conditions and engagement. Rothmann and Rothmann83 found that 20% of the total variance of psychological meaning and availability explains the variance of engagement among two samples from various organisations in South Africa. Van Zyl, Deacon and Rothmann84 also explored the relations between the experience of work-role fit, meaningfulness and engagement among industrial and organisational psychologists in South Africa. They found that people with a “calling” orientation towards work will experience more psychological meaningfulness and engagement. The study by Rothmann and Welsh85 of a sample of 309 employees in an organisation in Namibia reported that the effect size of psychological meaningfulness (F = 24.69, p ≤ 0.01) was almost double the size of psychological availability (F = 5.24, p ≤ 0.01). This suggests that employees who perceive that they fit their work roles and view the workplace as conducive to living out their beliefs and values tend to invest greater personal effort in their jobs.86 Surprisingly, availability of resources and support from colleagues were found to indirectly relate to engagement through psychological availability. It is clear that Kahn’s87model of engagement has been tested in a number of different studies.88 However, these studies failed to uncover a significant relationship between all three psychological conditions and engagement, which has resulted in unsatisfactory psychometric properties.

10

Chapter 1: Theoretical framework for employee engagement

Schaufeli and Bakker (2004): burnout and engagement Schaufeli and Bakker89 position engagement and burnout as opposite but related constructs with regard to their relationships and outcomes such as job demands and job resources. In fact, engagement is conceived as the positive counterpart of the negative concept of burnout. Burnout represents a persistent work-related state of illbeing characterised by the dimensions of exhaustion, cynicism and reduced professional efficacy.90 Exhaustion includes feelings of overextension and is characterised by the experience of being drained of emotional energy and feelings of chronic fatigue. Cynicism entails a sense of generalised negativity and the distancing of oneself from others and various aspects of the job. Inefficacy refers to feelings of incompetence, a lack of achievement and diminished productivity.91 Accordingly, burnout is the result of high job demands and lack of job resources and can lead to negative outcomes such as staff turnover and absenteeism92 or health impairment. However, evidence exists to show that some people do not experience burnout, regardless of high job demands and working long hours, because they find pleasure in working harder and dealing with such job demands.93 The study by Moshoeu and Geldenhuys94 conducted among a sample of university employees reported that higher job insecurity resulted in higher levels of both organisational commitment and employee engagement. A number of studies found that a high level of job insecurity is related to a reduction in employee engagement. Instead of becoming estranged from their selves, Moshoeu and Geldenhuys’ study shows that employees have a sense of significance, enthusiasm, inspiration and pride in their organisation and work. It clearly shows the willingness of employees to expend considerable time and effort in doing something meaningful. These perspectives demonstrate that meaningful work can foster personal fulfilment and motivational qualities during unpleasant conditions in the work environment. Alternative views by Schaufeli et al. and Schaufeli and Bakker95 consider engagement as an independent, distinct concept that is positively related to burnout. In this viewpoint, engagement is conceived as “a positive, fulfilling and consistent state of mind”96 and is associated with good mental health and increase in job resources over time.97 In other words, employee engagement is the extent to which employees are motivated to contribute to organisational success, and are willing to apply discretionary effort to accomplishing tasks important to the achievement of organisational goals. The definition also characterises engagement as having three dimensions, namely vigour, dedication and absorption.98 Vigour refers to high levels of energy and mental resilience while working. Dedication signals strong involvement in one’s work and experiencing a sense of significance, enthusiasm and challenge. Absorption is characterised by being

11

Employee engagement in a South African context

fully concentrated and happily engrossed in work, whereby time passes quickly and one finds it difficult to detach oneself from work.99 In essence, engaged employees have high levels of energy and enthusiasm for their work and work well with other employees. Therefore, being energetic, dedicated and absorbed at work does not necessarily imply that employees have to work extremely long hours, but rather shows that engaged employees are enthusiastic, energetic, passionate and engrossed in their work activity. According to Gorgievski and Bakker,100 engaged employees do enjoy other things outside work, in contrast to workaholics who are excessively hard workers and spend a great deal of time doing work-related activities. For an engaged employee, work is challenging but fun rather than demanding and stressful. According to May et al.,101 engaged employees have a tendency to report that their jobs make good use of their skills and abilities, are challenging and stimulating, and provide them with a sense of personal accomplishment. A considerable number of studies have shown that employee engagement is associated with various positive outcomes in terms of work wellness for several reasons. For instance, employee engagement is known as a positive state of mind102 and relates to good health and positive work effect. Employee engagement is also positively related to organisational commitment103 and is expected to affect employee performance.104 The next section outlines the dimensions of engagement as explained by Schaufeli and colleagues,105 namely vigour, dedication and absorption.

Vigour Vigour refers to high levels of energy and mental resilience at work and the willingness to invest high effort in one’s work activities and persistence in difficult circumstances.106 This dimension is characterised by employees’ willingness to invest effort in their work, not easily becoming fatigued and persisting even in the face of difficulties at work. This dimension is closely related to the concept of motivation, essentially intrinsic motivation that ensures goal-oriented behaviour and persistence in attaining objectives along with levels of activation (vigour) and feeling enthusiastic and identifying with and being proud of one’s job (dedication).107 Employees’ drive, perseverance and interest in work depend on the extent to which the organisation provides them with the resources they need to perform their work roles.

Dedication Dedication is characterised by a sense of significance, enthusiasm, pride, inspiration and challenge in relation to one’s work.108 This dimension has been conceptually linked to the concept of job involvement (or commitment), defined as the degree to which an employee psychologically relates to his or her job and to the work performed therein.109 Job involvement, on the other hand, is considered a function of how far the job can

12

Chapter 1: Theoretical framework for employee engagement

satisfy an employee’s present needs. Dedication appears to be a broader phenomenon with respect to its operationalisation than job involvement, in the sense that dedication includes feelings of enthusiasm, inspiration, pride and challenge, while involvement focuses on the psychological importance of the job in an employee’s life.

Absorption Absorption refers to a feeling of being focused on one’s work and finding detaching oneself from work activities difficult.110 It entails a pleasant state in which employees are totally immersed in their work, forgetting about everything else. This dimension is conceptually similar to the concept of short-term “flow”. The term “flow experience” can be defined as a state of mind in which people are so intensely involved in their activities that nothing else seems to matter, because the experience itself is so enjoyable, and they would even do it at greater cost, purely for the sake of doing it. Csikszentmihalyi111 described as “flow” a phenomenon that occurs when people have a sense of control over what they are doing, and where they feel competent and efficacious in their ability to do their work. On the other hand, Schaufeli and Bakker112 maintain that the concept of flow is more complex and includes many aspects that refer in particular to short-term peak experiences, instead of a more pervasive and persistent state of mind, as is the case with engagement. Bakker, Demerouti and Euwema113 also apply the concept of flow to the work situation, and describe it as a short-term peak experience at work that is characterised by absorption, work enjoyment and intrinsic work motivation. That is, employees who enjoy their work and feel happy, make a very positive judgement about the quality of their working life. The authors illustrated that employees who feel intrinsic motivation need to perform a certain work-related activity with the aim of experiencing the inherent pleasure and satisfaction in the activity. However, Csikszentmihalyi114 asserts that employees who are motivated by the intrinsic aspects of their work tasks want to continue their work because they are fascinated by the tasks they perform.

Empirical validation of burnout and engagement Several studies have repeatedly shown that the dimensions of vigour and dedication represent the core function of employee engagement.115 More specifically, vigour and dedication are considered as the opposite poles of burnout dimensions, namely exhaustion and cynicism respectively, whereby vigour and exhaustion span a continuum labelled “energy” and dedication and cynicism are labelled “identification”. That is, vigour and exhaustion are classified as the energy continuum and dedication and cynicism as the identification continuum.116

13

Employee engagement in a South African context

Rothmann and Joubert117 report similar findings with job demands, job resources, burnout and work engagement among managers at a platinum mine in the North West province in South Africa. Using the Comprehensive Burnout Engagement (COBE) model, their study found that the Pearson correlation analysis confirmed that burnout consists of exhaustion and cynicism and was negatively related to engagement, which consists of vigour and dedication. The lower levels of burnout were related to higher levels of engagement (high levels of energy related to high levels of identification), confirming the findings of Schaufeli et al. 118 Recent studies have reported that exhaustion and vigour are only weakly or moderately related, suggesting that they represent independent constructs that nonetheless could manifest themselves simultaneously.119 In the study conducted by Demerouti et al.120 among a sample of South African employees in the construction industry, the results confirm the association between the identification dimensions of burnout (cynicism and disengagement) and work engagement (dedication) as each other’s opposite, while the energy dimensions (exhaustion and vigour) seem to represent two separate but highly related constructs. Although absorption was considered a component of employee engagement, recent developments have excluded the component as a latent dimension of engagement,121 implying that absorption does not form part of engagement. Moreover, recent developments have also found that professional efficacy and absorption were not considered opposites of each other’s endpoints.122 Specifically, professional efficacy has been conceived as a dimension of work engagement as compared to burnout, because its items are all framed rather positively.

Drivers of engagement Previous studies have consistently shown that job resources such as social support from colleagues and supervisors, performance feedback, skill variety, autonomy and learning opportunities are positively associated with engagement.123 Personal resources have also been linked to engagement. Luthans and Youssef124 maintain that individuals with goal self-concordance are intrinsically motivated to pursue their goals and as a result they trigger higher performance and satisfaction. The following section briefly discusses the drivers of engagement.

Job demands–resources model The job demands–resources (JD–R) model has been used to explain how job resources affect employees’ level of engagement. A considerable number of studies on engagement have made use of the JD–R model as a useful framework to understand how engagement can be fostered within the organisation. The model is based on the assumption that in

14

Chapter 1: Theoretical framework for employee engagement

every organisation there exist two categories, namely job demands and job resources, which are applicable to various organisational settings.125 Job demands are “aspects of the job that require sustained physical or mental effort and are therefore associated with certain psychological and/or psychological cost such as exhaustion”.126 Job demands are associated with strain reaction, particularly if they exceed the employee’s adaptive capacity. That is, job demands are activities that employees have to perform in their working environment. The job demands are not necessarily seen as negative as anticipated; however they can turn into job stressors when meeting those demands that require high effort associated with high costs that elicit negative responses such as depression, anxiety or burnout. Typical examples of job demands include workload, time pressure, work pressure, emotional exhaustion, lack of skills and abilities to complete the required work task and lack of support from both colleagues and supervisor to meet demands.127 Schaufeli128 indicates that the JD–R model is preferred mostly by a segment of researchers who consider engagement as the antithesis of burnout, merely because the latter constructs are treated as a separate entity to integrate an overarching conceptual model of engagement. Job and personal resources are connected to how well employees cope with the stress arising from job demands and their level of work engagement in the daily task of meeting these demands.129 Based on the expansion of the JD–R model, work engagement inherently emanates from the motivating nature of resources distinguished as job and personal resources. Job resources are aspects of the job that are functional in achieving work goals, stimulate personal growth and development and reduce job demands.130 Job resources constitute the working conditions, social support and instruction that help employees complete their work roles because of their belief that they can achieve. However, the absence of sufficient job resources, to perform the job effectively could threaten and trigger an increase in the amount of stress employees experience during work activity, resulting in disengagement. According to Hobfoll131 job resources are not only necessary for dealing with job demands and getting things done, but are also important in their own right. For instance, job resources play an intrinsic motivational role in fostering individual growth, learning and development, or an extrinsic motivational role that helps individuals achieve working goals. Furthermore, availability and accessible resources are associated with positive organisational outcomes through employee engagement. Typical examples of job resources include job-specific resources (variety of tasks, autonomy, performance feedback, adequate job information), organisational resources (opportunity for advance in career) and social resources (social support from colleagues

15

Employee engagement in a South African context

and supervisors),132 which to a larger extent relate positively to engagement. Job resources foster engagement in terms of vigour (energy), dedication (persistence) and absorption (focus). Personal resources, on the other hand, relate to aspects of the self that are associated with resilience and refer to the individual’s sense of the ability to control and influence his or her environment successfully.133 They are cognitive beliefs that are valued by the individual and can serve as a means of obtaining other resources such as objects, energies or work conditions (Xanthopoulou et al. 2007). These personal resources are also responsible for stimulating personal growth and development (career advancement and aspirations), achieving goals and protecting the individual from threats, which ultimately will result in positive personal outcomes like engagement. Perceptions of personal growth, learning and development tend to empower employees in that they feel they can succeed in job roles, leading to feelings of self-efficacy, intrinsic motivation and engagement. Within the JD–R model, Xanthopoulou et al.134 maintain that personal resources are used primarily to determine the efficacy of predicting employee engagement for different organisations. These personal resources can be a means to achieve various optimistic personal uniquenesses, objects, energies or work conditions in future because individuals give importance to these characteristics in order to stay connected with their work.135 They are modelled as mediators through which job resources prevent burnout and enhance work engagement.136 Empirical evidence of a significant positive relationship between personal resources and work engagement has been supported by Salanova, Schaufeli, Xanthopoulou and Bakker.137 In addition, personal resources are conceived as a moderator in the relationship between environmental factors and organisational outcomes.138 However, other researchers have found that personal resources do not buffer the relationship between job demands and organisational and health-related outcomes. For instance, Xanthopoulou et al.139 examined the role of personal resources, which consist of self-efficacy, organisational-based self-esteem and optimism, in predicting exhaustion and employee engagement. Using structural equation modelling (SEM), they found evidence that personal resources do not in fact mediate the relationship between job demands and exhaustion, but instead, partially mediate the relationship between job resources (autonomy, social support and opportunity for career advancement) and employee engagement. These suggest that job resources foster the development of personal resources, which may subsequently lead to greater employee engagement through the motivational process. On the contrary, the association between job and personal resources can facilitate the health impairment process, particularly when job demands are high.140 It is assumed 16

Chapter 1: Theoretical framework for employee engagement

that when job demands are high, additional effort must be exerted to achieve the work goals and to prevent decreasing performance.141 This implies that high job demands can foster the motivational effect of job and personal resources,142 which will enhance work engagement. The interaction hypothesis is based on the notion that the combination of high demands and high resources produces the highest levels of motivation, and then ultimately of engagement. It suggests that under stressful conditions (high job demands) individuals are more likely to use resources as a coping mechanism or stressreducing action in order to achieve their organisational goals. This assertion echoes the conservation of resources (COR) theory.143 The central part of the COR theory is that individual employees strive to protect, maintain and increase their resources including objects (a home, clothes, food), personal characteristics (self-esteem) and energies (time, money, and knowledge) to such an extent that under demanding conditions, such resources could be used to boost their wellbeing, in terms of engagement.144 This implies that job resources gain their motivational potential particularly when employees are confronted with high job demands. Therefore, when the external environment lacks resources individuals cannot reduce the potentially negative influence of high job demands and they cannot achieve their work goals. The COR theory predicts that in such a situation employees will experience a loss of resources or failure to gain an investment.145 Furthermore the COR theory is based on the assumption that individuals must endeavour to acquire and maintain their resources, which is similar to mastery-oriented strategies (mastery and control as identified by Sonnentag and Fritz).146 Mastery experiences are pursuing mastery-related off-job activities that offer an individual challenges or opportunities to learn new skills.147 These experiences are expected to enhance recovery when the external environment lacks resources by merely creating internal resources, such as skills, competencies, self-efficacy and positive mood. On the other hand, control over leisure time entails activities that a person can decide to do during leisure time and how and when to do them. According to Sonnentag and Fritz,148 the experience of control during leisure time may increase self-efficacy and feelings of competence; therefore it acts as an external resource that promotes recovery from job strain. In a large heterogeneous sample of employees Bakker et al.149 tested the interaction hypothesis of the proposition work attitudes (task enjoyment and organisational commitment) are most positive when job demands and job resources are both high. Results of moderated SEM analyses provided strong support for the hypothesis. That is, job resources (skill utilisation, learning opportunities, autonomy, colleague support, leader support, performance feedback, participation in decision-making and career opportunities) predicted task enjoyment and organisational commitment particularly under conditions of high job demands (workload and emotional demands). This suggests that resources become most salient under demanding conditions. In other words, 17

Employee engagement in a South African context

there is a need for a challenge (a demanding condition) in order for job resources to be translated into task enjoyment and work engagement. Figure 1.1 represents the experience of employee engagement and its antecedents and outcomes. Job resources Autonomy Performance feedback Social support Supervisory coaching Etc Personal resources Optimism Self-efficacy Resilience Self-esteem Etc

Employee engagement Vigour Dedication Absorption

Performance In-role performance Extra-role performance Creativity Financial turnover Etc

Figure 1.1: The experience of employee engagement and its antecedents and outcomes (adapted from Schaufeli 2013:35)

Figure 1.1 shows that the different variables of resources that are related to engagement have a link to performance. Figure 1.1 postulates the relationships between job resources, personal resources, employee engagement and performance and shows that job and personal resources are instrumental in promoting employee engagement. That is, employees who are highly engaged and perform well will also mobilise more personal resources and more job resources such as autonomy, social support and career opportunities. Furthermore, it proposes that the impact of job and personal resources on work engagement is particularly strong when job demands are high. In terms of the model, the high impact of employee engagement can manifest in better performance. Finally, the figure postulates that a combination of high employee engagement and improved performance inspires employees to create their own resources, which subsequently enhances engagement. According to Salanova et al.,150 individuals strive to protect their resources, and to accumulate resources over time.

OUTCOMES OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT As previously mentioned, employee engagement is important for any organisation because it is associated with positive organisational outcomes such as increased job satisfaction, organisational commitment, motivation and low turnover intention and improves health and wellbeing, in-role and extra-role performance.151 Halbesleben152 asserts that such outcomes are particularly important as organisations are increasingly

18

Chapter 1: Theoretical framework for employee engagement

looking at ways to effectively improve performance and engage employees in their work roles. Consequently, Schaufeli and Salanova153 are of the opinion that such outcomes rest heavily on sufficient motivation and energising resources that can stimulate employee engagement in order for the organisation to maximise its investment. In addition, Chughtai and Buckley154 accentuate that investing in conditions that foster employee engagement is vital for the growth and profitability of the organisation. In a business context, Harter et al.155 found a positive association between the level of employee engagement and business-unit performance (ie customer satisfaction and loyalty, profitability, productivity, turnover and safety). They concluded that engagement is “related to meaningful business outcomes at a magnitude that is important to many organisations”.156 There are a number of reasons to expect engagement to be related to work outcomes. For instance, the experience of engagement has been described as a fulfilling, positive, work-related experience and state of mind and has been found to be related to good health and positive work affect.157 The next section presents possible outcomes of employee engagement for both individual employees and organisations.

Organisational commitment Organisational commitment is considered a vital variable in facilitating the understanding of an employee’s attitudes and behaviour in the workplace. It is viewed as a valuable tool to determine employees’ attitudes and behaviours as well as setting up blueprints for the continued existence and success of an organisation during unpleasant organisational situations.158 According to Salami,159 organisational commitment has the potential to cultivate a healthy organisational climate, increase morale, motivate employees and increase productivity. Therefore, it is imperative for the organisation to continually keep employees engaged in their work roles for its survival. It further follows that engaged employees are generally more committed to their employing organisation and therefore have a lower intention to quit because of the enormous amounts of time and energy they have invested in the organisation and their attachment to their work roles.160 Such organisational commitment and attachment and the availability of resources make quitting impossible. Schaufeli and Bakker161 maintain that if employees are provided with a variety of tasks in their work roles, such as learning opportunities and autonomy, they will be more likely to engage in activities at work.

Job satisfaction There is wide research positioning job satisfaction as an outcome of employee engagement, and it is described by Saks162 as a congenial state derived from the

19

Employee engagement in a South African context

judgment of an employee’s work experiences. Generally speaking, job satisfaction has been shown to have a relationship with attitudes and behaviours in many literatures. Saks163 asserts that engaged employees are found to be more satisfied with their jobs than their non-engaged counterparts. That is, the happier engaged employees are the more satisfied they are with their work activity, and they are more likely to increase their level of engagement and ultimately go the extra mile to complete and achieve their organisational goals. However, excessive engagement and personal resources can do more unintended harm to individual employees than anticipated, particularly when the desired outcomes seem impossible to achieve. In similar vein, Macey and Schneider164 note that “there are limits on the pool of energy and resources available to employees” and that “sustained levels of engagement will be difficult to achieve.”165 This simply implies that employees who exert significant energy and resources at work may find themselves depleted when they are supposed to carry on other life activities, thereby creating a situation where their work interferes with family responsibilities. In addition, Halbesleben et al.166 argue that excessive engagement can basically worsen work–family conflicts beyond the effects of workaholicism, because the employee will be left with little or no energy and resources (time, energy and focus) to execute other activities (family).

CONCLUSION The aim of this chapter was to explore and understand the importance of employee engagement within organisations. It was not the intention to decide whether practitioners or academic researchers present a more clear and concise understanding of employee engagement, but rather to find ways in which engagement can be achieved. From the discussion, it is clear that employee engagement is a unique, positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterised by vigour, dedication and absorption, and can be measured using a reliable and valid instrument known as the UWES, which relies on a self-reporting questionnaire. However, there is extensive empirical evidence on the perspectives of engagement, which at present do not give a clear understanding of engagement. In particular, it becomes difficult to actually decide which definition of engagement captures the end results of what engagement looks like: when it is achieved as either the psychological states experienced by individual employees as they contribute to the success of the organisation or as behavioural aspects.

20

Chapter 2 Engagement and strategy by Hester Nienaber

INTRODUCTION Employee engagement is important because of its significance in shaping competitiveness, in particular competitive advantage. By now it is accepted that competitive advantage ensures enhanced organisational performance. Hence engagement has received heightened attention recently from both practitioners and academics, evidenced in the works of authors such as the CIPD,1 Fearon, McLaughlin and Morris,2 Harter, Schmidt and Hayes3 and Schaufeli and Salanova.4 Academic researchers from a variety of disciplines, including strategy, strategic HR management, human capital and talent management, agree that competitive advantage is the hallmark of a rigorous strategy. Strategy, according to the founding fathers of the field like Andrews5, Ansoff6 and Drucker,7 is the tool organisations use to achieve their goals. Contemporary authors like Nilsson and Elström8 and Ployhart et al.9 concur with this view of strategy. Moreover, they are unanimous that strategy is the responsibility of the CEO. In addition, they all agree that the ultimate goal of an organisation is long-term survival and growth, otherwise known as sustainability. Moreover, they are of the view that goal achievement reflects organisational performance. In this regard, a number of academic and practitioner researchers have observed that organisational performance can be improved, which is a reflection on the CEO. These researchers include Aguinis,10 Mankins and Steele11 and Mintzberg,12 to mention a few. This observation is also true for South African organisations, as observed by Van der Merwe and Nienaber.13 The main reason advanced for improving organisational performance stems from strategy implementation failure owing to a lack of resources, in particular employees with the requisite knowledge and skills, or “human capital”. Hence, engagement is a topic deserving of attention, especially that of the CEO. In illuminating engagement and strategy this chapter draws on theoretical frameworks, specifically the philosophy of management, human capital theory, organisational theory and organisational behaviour.

ENGAGEMENT Since Kahn14 first conceptualised engagement, progress has been made in studying this construct. Nevertheless, authors are not unanimous: some, like Bakker, Albrecht and Leiter,15 question the scientific merit of engagement, while Guest16 doubts whether it is built on a sound theoretical base but is merely a passing management fad like many 21

Employee engagement in a South African context

others. One can understand these concerns given the variety of conceptualisations of engagement that appear in both practitioner and academic texts. These conceptualisations result in different definitions and thus in a range of measuring instruments, the validity of some of which can be improved according to Klassen et al.17 and Viljevac et al.18 After all, engagement, like any other construct, needs to be measured by a rigorous (reliable and valid) scale, as pointed out by scale gurus Aguinis and Edwards,19 which will result in outcomes that are useful for managers intending to take action aimed at bringing about change and thus improvement. Engagement is conceptualised at different organisational levels, that is, the individual, team/unit and organisational levels. The most commonly used conceptualisation is at the individual level, according to a study by Attridge.20 Saks21 points out that these conceptualisations of engagement represent different types of engagement. Nevertheless, authors’ conceptualisation of engagement, whether at the individual or organisational levels, differs.

Engagement at individual level The two most commonly used conceptualisations of engagement, at the individual level, are those of Kahn22 and Schaufelli, Salanova, González-Romá and Bakker.23 Although these conceptualisations are comparable, they differ in some respects. Kahn24 indicates that his work expands on the work of Goffman,25 which according to Schaufeli et al.26 forms part of role theory. Kahn’s27 concept of engagement reflects a more or less enduring state of psychological presence28 focusing on how the individual occupies the organisational role29 as organisational member30 and brings more or less of the self to the role.31 Accordingly, Kahn describes engagement as the “harnessing of the organisation members’ selves to their work roles; engaged people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally during role performances”.32 In explaining personal engagement Kahn33 refers to various authors and deems personal engagement to underlie effort,34 involvement,35 flow,36 mindfulness37 and intrinsic motivation.38 Kahn maintains that to express one’s preferred psychological conditions is to display real identity, thoughts and feelings.39 Kahn40 further cites authors who assert that self-expression underlies creativity,41 the use of personal voice,42 emotional expression,43 authenticity,44 nondefensive communication,45 playfulness46 and ethical behaviour.47 Kahn’s description shows that his conception of engagement is related to, if not intertwined with, a number of human resources concepts.48 Kahn’s description of engagement is typically interpreted to mean that engaged people are psychologically present when occupying and performing an organisational role, as a member of the organisation. Moreover, Kahn49 indicates that he supports the view of Oldham and Hackman50 that the psychological experience of work drives people’s attitudes and behaviours, and the view of Alderfer51 that individual, inter-personal, group, 22

Chapter 2: Engagement and strategy

inter-group and organisational factors simultaneously influence these experiences. This explanation shows that the individual employee, in discharging his or her duties, does not operate in a vacuum, but is immersed in the context of the employer organisation. This resonates with the view of Ployhart et al.52 and Shantz and Alfes,53 which is important for modern-day organisational managers, especially the CEO. In addition, Kahn found that there were three psychological conditions associated with engagement or disengagement at work, namely meaningfulness (which is associated with work elements creating incentives or disincentives to engage), safety (which is associated with elements of social systems creating more or less nonthreatening conditions to engage) and availability (which is associated with individual distractions that preoccupy people to various degrees and leave them with more or fewer resources with which to engage in role performance).54 Kahn found that employees were more engaged at work in situations that offered them more psychological meaningfulness and psychological safety and when they were more psychologically available.55 This observation was empirically tested by May, Gilson and Harter, who found that meaningfulness, safety and availability were, indeed, significantly related to engagement.56 Moreover, employees choose to engage themselves to varying degrees depending on their experience of meaningfulness, safety and their psychological availability. This account of engagement shows that it can be explained by Social Exchange Theory;57 that is, employees negotiate exchanges with the organisation in which the actions of one party evoke reciprocation by the other, as explained by Blau.58 It is important for all to take note of this, especially managers. Rothbard studied engagement in multiple roles (work and family) and the effects (enrichment and depletion) of engaging in multiple roles.59 Rothbard60 points out that attention and absorption are critical elements of engagement, which she deems part of Kahn’s61 conceptualisation of engagement. According to Rothbard, attention is “cognitive availability and the amount of time one spends thinking about a role”.62 Absorption means “being engrossed in a role and refers to the intensity of one’s focus on a role and conveys a sense of intensity of concentration … which may be positive or negative”. Rothbard contends that attention and absorption are related, but distinct, motivational constructs to act.63 Rothbard’s64 conceptualisation of role engagement focuses on the emotional responses of people to role engagement and how these emotional responses in one role affect engagement in another role.65 This brief description shows that Rothbard’s66 and Kahn’s67 conceptualisations of engagement correspond regarding the cognitive and emotional dimensions. The engagement research of Schaufelir et al.68 takes a different trajectory to that of Kahn.69 They conceptualise engagement as being the opposite of burnout, and associated with wellbeing. Wellbeing is a major concern for most contemporary businesses in view of the increase in occupational diseases like stress and depression, as reported 23

Employee engagement in a South African context

by researchers like Brough, Dollard and Tuckey,70 Kayastha, Murthy and Adhikary71 and Beehr and Newman.72 Schaufeli et al. define engagement as “a positive, fulfilling, workrelated state of mind that is characterised by vigour, dedication, and absorption, which is a more persistent and pervasive affective-cognitive state (than a fleeting and specific state that is not focused on any particular object, event, individual, or behaviour)”.73 They describe vigour as characterised by high levels of energy and mental resilience while working, the willingness to invest effort in one’s work, and persistence even in the face of difficulties. According to Schaufeli et al., dedication is being intensely involved in one’s work and experiencing a sense of significance, enthusiasm, inspiration, pride and challenge.74 Absorption, according to the authors, is characterised by being fully concentrated and happily captivated in one’s work, whereby time passes quickly and one has difficulty detaching oneself from work.75 Kahn76 and Schaufeli et al.77 seemingly use different theories (role theory, social exchange theory, motivational theory) versus wellbeing and labels (psychological presence versus state of mind) to explain engagement. However, these conceptualisations are similar in that they hold that engagement, a distinct construct, is more or less persistent and refers to a work role occupied by a member of an organisation. Moreover, on closer examination more similarities emerge: both conceptualisations involve energy, cognition and emotion and are thus multi-dimensional in nature; and both can be explained by motivational theories.

Engagement at the organisational level Given that engagement is associated with an individual occupying a work role in an organisation and that individual, interpersonal, group, intergroup and organisational factors simultaneously influence engagement, some authors portray engagement at the team and/or departmental level (as pointed out by researchers like Fearon et al.,78 Harter et al.,79 Macey and Schnieder80 and Saks,81) and others, like Dyer82 and Nienaber and Martins,83 at the organisational level. It is reasoned that because engagement relates to a work role, it cannot be detached from the organisation, as work is designed to achieve organisational goals, and thus performance. In addition it is maintained that engagement at the organisational level of measurement includes aspects of engagement that cannot be captured by (merely) aggregating individual or unit measures (for a comprehensive discussion on this topic see Harter et al., 2002; Saks, 2006; Pugh & Dietz, 2008; Fearon et al., 2013). An organisation, to briefly recap, is an entity enabling society to pursue purposes or accomplishments that cannot be achieved by individuals acting alone, according to Greenwald84, Griseri85 and Ployhart et al.86 Organisations thus provide formal frameworks for focusing the collective efforts of individuals on common, identifiable goals, which represent a relatively long-term state and if achieved would contribute to fulfilling the 24

Chapter 2: Engagement and strategy

organisation’s purpose as reflected in its mission. According to Drucker (1954),87 the purpose of an organisation is to deliver products and/or services that are needed and wanted by its customers, provide employment and contribute to wealth creation, which is a broader concept than profit maximisation and involves more stakeholders than merely shareholders, as pointed out by Goldman, Nienaber and Pretorius.88 Engagement at the individual level, as described by Kahn89 and Schaufelli et al.,90 recognises the organisational context. Moreover, meaningfulness as described by Kahn91and significance as described by Schaufeli et al.92 suggest that organisation members must have a sense of their contribution to organisational goal achievement, which is supported by the research of Fearon et al.93 However, they go further and point out that individuals will disengage if they feel that they and/or their actions do not contribute to (organisational) goal achievement. This observation resonates with that of Shantz and Alfes.94 Goal achievement is facilitated by line managers, the link between the organisation and its employees. By virtue of their position in the organisation line managers play a central role in goal achievement and thus engagement. The importance of line managers is captured in the adage “people join organisations, but leave their bosses”. Interactions between line managers and individual employees are critical and need to be congruent with the values of the organisation, as pointed out by both academic and practitioner researchers like CIPD,95 Fearon et al.96 and Ployhart et al.,97 to support engagement. According to the CIPD98 and Shantz and Alfes,99 a range of issues is directly affected by the line manager that empower or frustrate employees in carrying out their work to achieve organisational goals. Hence, it is important that line managers are mindful of how they treat employees, especially with fairness and respect; provide autonomy to employees; pay attention to the quality of communication with employees, including clarifying expectations; and attend to teamwork and employee learning and development to ensure that employees are empowered rather than controlled so that they perform their duties in striving to reach organisational goals. If this is done employees experience a sense of appreciation and respect, which is reinforced by line managers who listen to the employees; that is, actively seeking and implementing their views, showing them that their opinions count and make a difference. Likewise, behaviour throughout the organisation that is consistent with its stated values leads to trust and a sense of integrity. In that way the line manager demonstrates that he or she is a committed human agent, and improves the likelihood of stimulating beneficial reciprocal exchanges from employees.100 Hence, the CIPD (2014) advises that it is imperative that senior management capitalise on this valuable contribution of line managers, rather than bypassing them.101 In summary, engagement at the organisation level acknowledges that employees perform a role as organisational members, and thus in the context of the organisation. Engagement at the organisational level endeavours to account for the dynamics at that level. Moreover, meaningfulness and significance are related to the perceptions and experiences of employees as to whether they contribute to the purpose of the 25

Employee engagement in a South African context

organisation in discharging their duties. Organisational members’ interactions influence their experiences and perceptions of work, which drive their attitudes and behaviours. Consequently, these interactions should be congruent with organisational values; this fosters trust. The line manager plays a critical role in influencing an individual employee’s choice to engage or disengage. Hence, top management should include line managers in efforts to make the most of their valuable contribution in securing organisational performance.

Synthesis of engagement Given that engagement is a latent construct, it stands to reason that indicators must be used to identify it. In view of the multi-dimensional and multi-disciplinary nature of the construct, which makes it complex, it is reasonable that different researchers will conceptualise it differently. Hence, diverse indicators will be used to identify, measure and leverage engagement. Likewise, the nature of the construct also makes measuring difficult, as multi-dimensional constructs generally fail to establish construct validity. Moreover, the explanation of such a complex construct might benefit from using a variety of theories, instead of relying on a single theory – the general, current practice. Nevertheless, a significant observation managers and especially CEOs should heed is that employees choose the degree to which they engage, based on, inter alia, relationships in the workplace. Managers, especially line managers, with the support of top management, can create an environment in which engagement can be leveraged.

FROM ENGAGEMENT TO STRATEGY Strategy has been described as a “potentially powerful tool to cope with change, but a somewhat elusive concept” by Ansoff and McDonnell,102 which captures the essence of strategy. More recently, strategy has been defined as “a field that deals with the major intended and emergent initiatives taken by general managers on behalf of owners, involving the utilisation of resources to enhance the performance of organisations in their external environment with a view to financial gain” after extensive research by Nag, Hambrick and Chen103 involving both practitioners and academics. This definition is consistent with the view that strategy is the tool management uses to achieve organisational goals and thus secure organisational performance, as mentioned in the introduction. Consequently, Jarzabkowski and Spee advise that organisational members, regardless of their position in the organisation, do strategy in discharging their duties in pursuing organisational goals.104 Hence, it stands to reason that should any task or activity not contribute to goal achievement, it should not be done and should be removed from the agenda. Because employees have a stake in organisational goal achievement, and they think about their work and how it contributes to goal achievement as pointed out by Griseri,105 they are stakeholders in strategy. Hence, their voice should be sought and heard in connection with strategy shaping. 26

Chapter 2: Engagement and strategy

Competitive advantage Strategy, to be effective, should be based on “competitive advantage” according to Porter. Competitive advantage essentially means that the organisation does something better than the competition in attracting customers on the basis of value offered based on resources at its disposal.106 Resources should be combined to leverage their benefit to the organisation, as described by researchers like Barney,107 Huselid,108 Ployhart et al.,109 Shantz and Alfes,110 and Sirmon, Hitt, Ireland and Gilbert.111 Hence, competitive advantage should be embedded in the organisation to be persistent. Competitive advantage is linked to the resourced-based view of the firm, and has been described by Barney (1991), in terms of the characteristics of resources, namely valuable, rare, inimitable and nonsubstitutable.112 Barney explains that resources can be valuable only to the degree that they enable an organisation to conceive of or implement strategies that improve its effectiveness and efficiency. Resources are rare when they are not abundantly available to competitors to implement a value-creating strategy. Valuable and rare resources can only create and sustain a competitive advantage if they cannot be obtained by competitors and thus are imperfectly inimitable. Nonsubstitutability means that there must be no strategically equivalent valuable resources that are themselves either not rare or inimitable. In addition, the role of line managers113 and nonstrategic human capital resources (critical for delivering performance leading to competitive parity, but not competitive advantage), who constitute a significantly large number of employees, are also acknowledged in the literature by authors like Ployhart et al.114 Furthermore, competitive advantage consists of three interrelated dimensions, namely a) the arena where the organisation chooses to compete, b) customer value (customer capital) and c) access to the required resources, including HR, processes, systems, information and assets (structural capital) to provide customer value in the chosen arenas, as explained by Nienaber, Cant and Strydom115 and Ordóňez de Pablo and Lytras.116 These dimensions of competitive advantage underscore the description of competitive advantage offered by Barney.117 Of these dimensions, resources, processes, systems, information and assets are entrenched in the organisation and are thus potentially persistent; they are the most important of these dimensions for providing customer value in a chosen arena. All resources, HR, whatever guise it takes, is among the most important in shaping a competitive advantage.

Human Resources as a dimension of competitive advantage The importance of HR or employees in organisational performance has been advocated since early writing on management by, specifically, Robert Owen,118 the father of personnel management. Employees are valuable because of the knowledge, skills, experience, attitudes and behaviour (competence) they bring to the workplace, which influence their interactions in the workplace. Authors in management, strategic management, 27

Employee engagement in a South African context

human capital and HR management, such as Bartlett and Ghoshal,119 Campbell et al.120 and Lewis121 and Lockwood,122 all point out that competence may change due to changes in the workplace and/or environment and thus impact the competitive advantage of the organisation. Despite the fact that organisations agree that having the right competence available is a priority, they acknowledge that their efforts, whether to recruit, develop or retain competence, fail: this is highlighted by Beechler and Woodward,123 Farndale, Scullion and Sparrow,124 Schuler, Jackson and Tarique125 and Vaiman, Scullion and Collings, among others.126 What is more, most contemporary organisations fail to deploy and coordinate their available competence (HR) optimally, as mentioned by Campbell et al.,127 which adversely affects competitive advantage. Many reasons are advanced for the unavailability of the required competence to secure a competitive advantage, including skills shortages, notably leadership and management skills, by both practitioners and academics like the CIPD,128 Farndale et al.,129 Halogen,130 Nilsson and Ellström,131 Schuler et al.132 and Vaiman et al.133 The unavailability of (human) resources is compounded by globalisation, the war for talent and the mobility of HR. The mobility of HR is fuelled by economic, family and career reasons, especially better remuneration, enhanced work–life balance and improved career development, as concluded by Carr, Inkson and Thorn134 and Holtom et al.135 In addition, Beechler and Woodward136 warn that demographic changes create scarcity, which intensifies the challenge to secure available HR. These include the ageing Baby Boomer generation who are retiring, leaving a knowledge void in the workplace. Moreover, the younger generations have unique characteristics, which differ in many respects from the older generations. The most important characteristic of the younger generations is that they are not loyal to an employer, but are instead committed to developing their skills. Thus, they value skills development and productivity, work–life balance, flexible time and competence, especially by management, according to Buahene and Kovary.137 This observation is supported by Moss,138 who found that the different generations view organisational culture differently, leading to the formation of subcultures that result in different expectations and needs. These issues are important in creating and sustaining a competitive advantage, which should be noted by managers at all hierarchical levels of the organisation. Some human capital researchers, like Becker139 and Campbell et al.,140 argue that HR can only contribute to competitive advantage if an isolating mechanism stops employees from taking their valuable competence to rival organisations. This view is consistent with the view that talent is generic in the sense that competence embodied in an individual has broader applicability than in the incumbent firm, as discussed by Nilsson 28

Chapter 2: Engagement and strategy

and Ellström141 and Ployhart et al.142 However, the supply of competence should be accompanied by employees’ willingness to dispense their competence as advocated by Huselid143 and Campbell et al.,144 while the organisation must be willing to afford the employees the opportunity to do so. Dispensing competence is influenced in large part by the employees’ level of engagement, which in turn influences creating a competitive advantage to secure organisational performance.

Strategy failure Given that employees do strategy, as advocated by Jarzabkowski and Spee,145 and the associated challenges in securing employees with the right competence, it is not surprising that authors like Aguinis146 observe that organisational performance can be improved. This statement is based on the gap between planned and realised performance, as observed by a host of practitioner and academic strategy researchers like Alexander,147 Cocks,148 Mankins and Steele,149 Mintzberg,150 Porter,151 Robert,152 Sandy,153 Schaap154 and Van der Merwe and Nienaber.155 These authors advance a range of reasons for the performance gap, but they are not in agreement, except on the overall fact that strategy implementation fails. The reasons advanced for the performance gap include the strategy itself, for example: •

•

• •

• •

•

The strategy is not well-formulated and/or approved and/or communicated to organisational members, resulting in a shared understanding, and/or all relevant stakeholders were not involved in the strategy-shaping process. There is a lack of resources, whether HR (in terms of numbers and competence), funding, time, structure, systems, information or procedures, which is not conducive to strategy implementation. Rewards/recognition and penalties are ineffective in facilitating strategy implementation. Critical issues were unidentified while unanticipated problems are encountered during implementation, including market reaction arising from the external environment specifically from customers and/or competitors or economic, political and legal factors. There is a lack of knowledge of business and industry. There are implementation difficulties, including ineffective coordination of implementation activities, unclear responsibilities and priorities and a focus on short-term profits alone. There is inadequate monitoring and poor leadership, especially down the line, denoting the complexity of strategy.

In examining the range of reasons offered for the strategy implementation breakdown presented by the researchers, whether from a practical or academic perspective, they 29

Employee engagement in a South African context

can be grouped into resources, mainly HR, leadership (at all hierarchical levels of the organisation) and employees; and, in particular, a dearth of competence. Resources are at the core of the strategy definition put forward by Nag, Hambrick and Chen156 and it is thus surprising to find that a lack of resources is fundamental to the failure of strategy, which presents an anomaly. Moreover, it is odd given the publicity for the importance of “talent” and the amount of attention devoted to assisting CEOs especially to correct the situation.

ENGAGEMENT AND STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION IN SOUTH AFRICA The South African situation seems to be no different to the picture painted in the preceding paragraphs. According to the South African engagement survey results of Martins and Nienaber,157 the engagement facets of “line manager” (at the team level of engagement) and “strategy and implementation” (at the organisational level of engagement) ranked the lowest among the engagement dimensions, as reflected in table 2.1. Table 2.1: Engagement survey scores158 Dimensions

2014 March

2015 December

September

Team

4.00

4.05

4.05

Organisational satisfaction

3.74

3.76

3.80

Customer service

3.68

3.72

3.72

Organisational commitment

3.67

3.70

3.73

Immediate manager

3.48

3.54

3.58

Strategy and implementation

3.33

3.38

3.40

OVERALL

3.66

3.70

3.73

According to the information in table 2.1, engagement declined slightly between August and December 2014 and increased between December 2014 and September 2015. The dimension “strategy and implementation” ranked the lowest of all dimensions, followed by “immediate manager”. As can be expected the six lowest-ranked statements were from these two dimensions of engagement. These statements are highlighted next.

The six lowest-ranked statements in the 2014 and 2015 surveys The six lowest-ranked statements in the 2014 and 2015 engagement surveys are:

30

Chapter 2: Engagement and strategy

• • • • • •

Risk-taking is encouraged in the organisation. I am satisfied with the way that my work performance is evaluated. The way we do things around here encourages high performance. My immediate manager gives me regular feedback that helps me to improve my performance. In my organisation individual employees are involved in implementing the strategy of the organisation. The organisation has a stimulating environment.

These statements are congruent with the reasons why strategy fails, as discussed in a previous paragraph, resulting in a performance gap. This information points to the employees’ habit of thinking about their job in terms of its significance and meaning and that they need a measure of job control – what skills to use and autonomy in decisionmaking – to ensure the success of the organisation. In considering the statements that were ranked unfavourably, it is clear that management and leadership can take action to correct the situation. This is addressed in the next section.

MANAGEMENT ACTION TO IMPROVE ENGAGEMENT AND STRATEGY IMPLEMENATION Organisational performance drives sustainability. Hence leadership and management, especially the CEO, should take action to leverage engagement to enhance strategy implementation. This can be achieved by firstly re-examining the purpose and long-term goals of the organisation, as the customers pay for everything. Establishing a shared purpose, with which employees connect emotionally, is paramount. Hence, the inputs of employees are crucial. Also, visibly aligning jobs to organisational goals is necessary for employees to see how their targets support organisational goals. At the same time priorities should be clear and supported by systems and processes. Leadership, down the line, should reinforce priorities by communicating clearly to confirm shared meaning. Communication should be supported by line managers encouraging and empowering employees in sense-making and decision-making, in accordance with organisational values. In all cases short- and long-term performance should be balanced, conceding that context plays an important role in time horizons. Thus external alignment is also important, with due regard to the fact that volatility may produce unexpected outcomes. To counter unexpected outcomes, organisations need to be agile, that is, open to new directions. This requires a constantly proactive stance in assessing limits and risks of existing approaches, including mind-sets, welcoming and supporting change.

31

Employee engagement in a South African context

To succeed in actioning improvements requires that employees, at all hierarchical levels of the organisation, are equipped with the competence needed to meet challenges, now and in the future. This implies a constant learning and development focus involving individuals, teams and/or the organisation.

CONCLUSION Engagement and strategy both consist of multiple, interdependent and interacting parts, making them complex. Moreover, engagement contributes to a competitive advantage, the hallmark of a sound strategy, is the tool organisations use to achieve goals and thus organisational performance. The most important dimension of competitive advantage is resources, and in particular HR, to provide customer value in the arenas where the organisation chooses to compete. This means that each and every individual in the organisation must be aware of the organisational purpose and every job must be aligned with the goals of the organisation to contribute to goal achievement and thus organisational performance. Moreover, jobs must be occupied by employees possessing the required competence to create value for customers in the chosen arenas and who are willing to dispense their competence in line with organisational values. The willingness to dispense competence is influenced by engagement, which in turn is impacted by line managers who create an environment in which employees can perform. As such engaged employees are the cornerstone of competitive advantage. Engagement and strategy are thus intertwined.

32

Chapter 3 Engagement in multi-cultural environments: Reflections and theoretical development by Rica Viljoen “The fastest way to change the feedback culture in an organisation is for the leaders to become better receivers.” Heen & Linn1

INTRODUCTION At any point in time, a company should be able to measure the capacity to perform within its system (the human energy in the system) in order to determine the essence of where it might be and how its members perceive its goals, objectives, leadership and culture. Further, the information must be informed by the interaction between individuals, teams, the organisation itself and the greater political, societal and situational context in which it operates.2 This is particularly important for organisations whose footprint spreads over diverse boundaries, with the unintended implication of delivering corporate solutions in worlds that are literally, and from a dynamic point of view, worlds apart. The way in which leadership rolls out strategic initiatives, engages its members in decision-making and builds an inclusive, accountable, transparent and consistent climate that encourages engagement, will to a large extent determine whether the company finds itself in a virtuous or vicious cycle of behaviour.3 Human energy in the system to perform is created in this way. The organisational culture contains competitive forces and political, economic, legislative, social and environment dynamics.4 Maybe more important are the dynamics that the over-culture introduces. In Jungian psychology the concept of the over-culture is sometimes used to describe the dominant culture in a society that contains stances of power dynamics, admiration and how advantages are bestowed.5 The social structural dynamics that often overwrite the organisational structure are contained in the overcultural dynamics. Without understanding cultural interrelatedness, the description of a phenomenon like engagement happens out of context. The over-culture or the containing system, as Ackoff6 refers to it, directly impacts on the functioning of an organisation. Changes within these environments are always systemic in nature, implying that direct/intended and indirect/unintended actions, impacts,

33

Employee engagement in a South African context

perceptions and resultant behaviours will always be present in an organisation. Gaining insight into and understanding of the various systemic and dynamic impacts will assist leadership in developing sustainable initiatives. If these initiatives are co-created by all, the unleashing of individual engagement and hence increased commitment to the company’s strategic drivers will occur spontaneously.7 An enquiry that aims at describing engagement in a multi-cultural setting that does not take the over-cultural dynamics into account, may be oblivious to the real dynamic it attempts to describe. In this chapter, the author attempts to define engagement in a multi-culturally sensitive manner to underline the importance of using multi-culturally sensitive instruments to conduct engagement studies and to share examples of where the measuring of engagement went wrong. The chapter introduces the Benchmark of Engagement Questionnaire (BeQ) as a multi-culturally sensitive instrument, and selected stories from conducting engagement research in 42 countries are shared. It concludes with prerequisites for engagement in multi-cultural settings and meta-insights for consideration in doing multicultural research. The author does not attempt to do a comprehensive literature review on engagement, as it has already been given in this book. Instead, the emphasis is placed on how a setting with diverse worldviews could be described authentically and how the over-cultural dynamics could be incorporated into the researcher’s conceptualisation of engagement. Furthermore, the researcher does not attempt to define the various constructs that are measured by the instrument, the BeQ, which is discussed in this chapter as a multiculturally sensitive organisational research philosophy and assessment methodology.i Rather, the accent is placed on insights into how any instrument can be used in a multicultural setting as long as the over-cultural dynamics are considered. Conceptualisation of relative terms is synthesised. Since some of the stories shared are snippets from actual multi-cultural research experiences, Sparkes’ tales are utilised for this purpose.8 These tales are presented in the first person. However, the scientific tale described by Sparkes is mostly applied in this chapter.9 Lastly, because the actual research took place in organisations, the name of the company is mentioned only in cases where specific permission was obtained. Examples of where multi-culturalism had a negative impact on the research results are described below and presented as an ethnographical tale. Most of the stories incorporated here were shared during actual research settings.

i

34

Theoretical definitions of the various constructs measured by the BeQ are described in detail in the book Inclusive Organisational Transformation (Viljoen, 2015). The development of the building blocks of the BeQ model is described in the author’sPhD thesis (2008).

Chapter 3: Engagement in multi-cultural environments: Reflections and theoretical development

Engagement in multi-cultural settings The importance of construct-based assessments Early in my career some distinct experiences occurred that led to the understanding that engagement may manifest differently in different worlds. I became acutely aware of the truth of this statement in our attempt in Absa to determine the culture of the organisation. In addition to Absa’s 32 000 employees in South Africa during 2003, Absa had a footprint in Namibia and Tanzania. Firstly, different aspects of what we describe as engagement, for example “respect”, have different dynamics for different people. What makes one person feel respected may be something totally different from what makes someone else feel that respected. It became clear that questions in the actual research instrument should be scientifically designed based on the psychological constructs that cause a specific engagement factor, rather than on reflection whether employees felt respected. The importance of a scientific approach to organisational research In a second case, the research team was chased from the site together with a highly-rated consulting group. Although I was only a junior HR practitioner at the time, it was one of the most humiliating experiences of my life. Firstly, the measurement was so generic that departmental differences were averaged. This led to a very generic numerical value that did not describe the dynamics in that particular setting. Secondly, in a previous study, the research group had conducted factor analysis on the data that they applied as theory in this setting. However, this did not hold true for that specific organisation, in that specific industry, in that specific country. I promised myself that if I were ever to lead such an intervention, I would ensure that inferential statistics were done for every system to determine individual uniqueness and that model equivalence in SEM would be conducted to test the validity of the assessment tool for various biographical groups. Thirdly, it became clear to me that somewhere at the end of the data-analysis process, human intervention in the form of data interpretation would become critical to describe the unique dynamics for incorporating the qualitative findings gathered through interviews, focus groups, solicited data and observations with the quantitative data. This would ensure that the data was relevant, authentic and fit, rather than generic and numeric. Rich, descriptive data is needed to describe the phenomenon of engagement. The importance of describing cultural dynamics The discontinuation of my association with the particular consultation group occurred while we were doing extensive research in Mali. In this lovely collectivistic country, the 35

Employee engagement in a South African context

leadership of the mining house had all studied in Russia, the population are communist and speak French while the workers speak Bambara, a local language. Our study indicated that employees did not trust management. I was still a junior in the team, and so it was my task to, first, give feedback to all, second, do joint action planning on how to enhance results in the sphere of influence of the workers and third, intervene in the dynamics. It very soon became clear that trust was not at all the issue in this system. The workers trusted management. However, as collectivistic, fundamentalist Muslim workers they would never put on record that they trusted humans. They trusted Allah (a name that as a woman I was not to pronounce), and would never record their trust in a human person on a form. It became very clear that we were totally missing the multi-cultural dynamics in this system, and were administering organisational change and development (OCD) “medicine” that was not needed. My interest in multi-culturalism was ignited. The importance of hearing the participants In Mali, people communicate in stories. They have a wonderful innate ability to understand metaphor. The nicely-prepared bulleted slides of the consultants had little effect on the local Malians. Although they were never rude, one could feel their contempt when they left the group. As a group they also appeared very nonresponsive. Fortunately I had three weeks to try and understand the dynamics of the local workers. The first insight dawned on me when I realised that every time the topic of discussion in the class was the previous day’s agenda. My traditional facilitation modalities to stimulate conversation in class failed miserably. I learned that the groups were so collective that most group members would not engage in discussion during the actual session in class; but at a tea circle afterwards, the group would be deeply in conversation to determine their collective stance towards the process. This stance would then be on the group’s agenda for the next day. Secondly, it became very clear that the minute a story was shared or a metaphor was used, the group would relate and respond. This was in contrast to their response to the professional, theoretical detail we attempted to share with PowerPoint slides. I had read a book on spiral dynamics10 before, but as yet had not integrated different multi-cultural worldviews into my own facilitative practice. It dawned on me that their thinking structure was analogue and not digital.11 I had to change my manner of speech and ultimately my logic. If I wanted to connect with the group, I also had to start communicating in stories. The importance of involving the leader Conducting similar research at three local mines in Mali, the leaders of the research team ended up upsetting one of the senior line managers considerably. Without briefing him first, their work exposed him in front of his team as a leader who did not have

36

Chapter 3: Engagement in multi-cultural environments: Reflections and theoretical development

soft leadership capabilities. He chased the research team off the mine and rejected the results. The workers, who had just built up hope that management would hear them, were even more disillusioned. The situation deteriorated quickly as the manager was an expatriate, and was labelled as being culturally insensitive and not wanting to hear what the locals felt. The researcher must be quite consultative in giving direct feedback. It is best to first provide direct and straightforward feedback to the line manager. Rather than humiliating the leader in front of his team, the themes can be discussed later, when working with the group. The best design is for the leader to open the session, saying that whatever is being said in the session comes from the group and that he will accept it, and that he mandates them to speak up since it is important to hear the views of everyone. The leader can then depart and leave the team to ponder on the results and plan what they can do about them. Later on, the researcher and the line manager together can strategise on ways to enhance culture. It particularly helps if there is research data on the collective psyche of the team and the multi-cultural dynamics in that specific space. The leader can be coached on how to deal with diversity of thought in his team. Different personality types, human niches and cultural dynamics contribute to this diversity. The importance of understanding gender dynamics Multi-cultural dynamics play a crucial role in organisations. In the Mali example, the head of the union thanked me for the interventions by saying: “For a woman you actually speak sense”. By implication, the message would have been more easily heard by the local Malians if it had come from a male. A woman did not really belong in the workplace. For the rest of my life this dynamic would determine whom I would use as the front face of an enquiry into the phenomenon of engagement. We had missed the gender-specific dynamics of this country. The importance of understanding power dynamics The culture in Mali can be described as socially hierarchical.12 There are social classes that deeply influence day-to-day interaction. The social power lines here are often not congruent with the authority structures of a typical organisational organogram. In the Mali system I was given the name “Djenebe Traore”, which is a name from the royal authority line. It meant that if, for example, I said: “I like your watch”, the watch owner had to hand over the valued item to me due to my social standing of authority. Business leaders must reflect on the influence of this dynamic on issues such as ownership, ethics and compliance when doing business in a foreign country. It impacts significantly on organisational dynamics.

37

Employee engagement in a South African context

The importance of an enquiry design that stimulates inclusivity The engagement researcher must be aware that by asking employees questions about what is important to them, the hope is created that leadership is caring enough to ask and to hear. It creates not only hope, but expectations. If leadership really cared, they would listen. Leaders must be aware of the unintended outcome of engagement studies, which can impact negatively on culture negating a well-meant attempt. For this reason, the use of a 10% sample as a dipstick of the general sense in the organisation is frowned upon. Other, more valid strategies can be followed in determining the sample size. First, the sample size can be determined using an alpha level of 0.05 and sampling error of 5% and applying these values to Cochran’s formula: n =    N 1 + N * e2 Where N = population size; n = sample size; and e = acceptable sampling error In this first-case organisation where the BeQ was administered with 1 200 people, the following applied: n =    1200 1 + 1200 * 0.052 n = 300 A sample size of 300 was identified to render a representative sample of the population. To my mind the value of engagement studies lies in the collective human energy that is unleashed when employees gather to discuss aspects of their social system that are important to them. This design principle changes a measurement of engagement into an OCD intervention.13 I prefer to ask as many people as possible to participate. Firstly, it helps with the stories and the rich qualitative data that brings the statistical quantitative results to life. Secondly, especially if there are low levels of trust in the system, it helps when everyone participates, or else they might simply say that these are not their results, and therefore they are not valid. Lastly, if feedback is given to everyone who participated, they will feel involved and included and all the benefits of inclusivity will be triggered.14 In Tanzania in 2005, I was part of a research project that was designed for participation by only 10% of the workers. The results were totally rejected by the other 90%, who claimed that firstly, they did not participate so the results were not a reflection of how they viewed things and secondly, that leadership chose participants who would score higher, and 38

Chapter 3: Engagement in multi-cultural environments: Reflections and theoretical development

deliberately excluded them. The trust relationship deteriorated due to our intervention – the opposite of our intention. The importance of designing an inclusive data-gathering process In my book Inclusive Organisational Transformation15 I documented a concern about generic, computer-generated engagement enquiry reports – that they were not specific enough to describe how people felt in their particular departments.16 Generic, nonspecific feedback and quantitative data are not helpful in describing a socially multi-faceted phenomenon such as engagement. “Happiness” questionnaires about how things “feel there” often do not provide systemic information on how to intervene, as causalities are not identified. The diagnostic nature of the specific engagement instrument that is used is critical. A business diagnostic tool can add value when it determines exactly what is to be enhanced, and where in the system it must be done. Furthermore, it must have the property of describing the multi-cultural dynamics of that part of the business, so that interventions and communications can be translated and implemented in a congruent manner. Ultimately, a convergent parallel design or concurrent triangulation design, as described by Cresswell and Clark,17 is followed during a BeQ process. In this type of mixed-methods approach the researcher collects and analyses both quantitative and qualitative data during the same phase of the research process and then merges the two sets of results into an overall interpretation.18 The importance of understanding causalities In other organisations where engagement studies were incorrectly applied and linked to performance, undesired behaviours were sometimes driven. In one case in the retail manufacturing sector, milk was not always available at the end of the month. An enquiry was launched, as the producer of the milk had ample levels of stock. It became clear that the internal supply chain manager was penalised when there were more than four complaints about milk at the end of every month. If there were fewer than five complaints about milk, she was paid a significant bonus. The risk of not receiving her incentive, led to the manager’s stopping ordering milk the minute there were three complaints. The incentive system that was implemented as a direct outcome of an engagement study to enhance organisational culture stimulated this devastating, vicious organisational behaviour, resulting in significant financial losses to the organisation.19 The importance of voluntarily participation A South African health-care engagement enquiry about the yearly bonus was conducted electronically. A 33% difference was found between engagement survey results received electronically and results from the same sample group where the survey was conducted

39

Employee engagement in a South African context

in ideal assessment settings and hard copies were used.ii The results were shared and the importance of confidentiality and remaining anonymous was emphasised. This specific health-care organisation had compromised trust relationships. No wonder that individuals did not trust the claim that the results would be confidential if the survey came from the computer’s IP address, which they feared could be tracked. The way in which the HR department tracked the outstanding assessments did not create trust. Participation was said to be voluntary. However, if employees did not participate, they received reminders that were not generic but rather explicit in saying that their responses were still outstanding.20 Consequently the workers told management what they assumed management wanted to hear. This organisation also required a 90% participation rate in the study and HR was held responsible for it. During the intervention phase on enhancing the identified issues, some of the managers admitted completing questionnaires on behalf of their staff members who were too busy with day-to-day operations to participate in the study. HR was very satisfied as a 90% participation rate was achieved, but the results did not provide valuable management information, and camouflaged the diversity of age and gender issues. Again, the interventions to enhance the culture were designed on incorrect data. The importance of confidentiality In another South African case, a departmental report was prepared for a group of four employees. One could clearly identify who responded and who did not. The results were not anonymous, and feedback resulted in racial tension.iii Viljoen21 explains that it is important not to collate a report if the individual dynamics or voices of the employees cannot be hidden. A good rule of thumb is not to write a departmental report if there are not at least eight people participating.22 An engagement study is not so much about who said what. Rather, it is concerned with how individuals, groups, organisations, the industry and societal dynamics manifest in a manner that can be described as virtuous or vicious.23 The facilitator who gives the feedback should steer the conversation away from what was said by a specific individual to a synthesis of what it means to be an employee in the specific system under investigation.

ii

Confidential research findings that manifested in an organisational transformational turnaround strategy currently being prepared by the author.

iii The guidelines of the HSPCSA in this regard protect the consultant.

40

Chapter 3: Engagement in multi-cultural environments: Reflections and theoretical development

A universal conceptualisation of engagement Introduction Taking over-cultural dynamics into account when working with engagement studies is of the utmost importance in describing the social systemic dynamics accurately. A rich contextual integrated view of engagement must be adopted and a fluid, flowing and permeable approach is needed. The entire process of the design of the questionnaires up till actual feedback should take country- or region-specific dynamics into account in terms of individual, group, organisational and over-cultural domains. Questions like “time flies when I am at work” are not understood in West Africa. Another example is “I work to have leisure time”, which also in most instances does not apply in West and East Africa. Here, a person works to live. Incorporating these questions resulted in a big mining house assuming that workers in Ghana were lazy and the wrongful assumption was made that they just wanted more money. The dynamic that was created by this incorrect assumption, namely a judgemental approach towards local workers, resulted directly in lower levels of engagement, with the corresponding impact on business indicators such as production and safety indicators. The need arose to ensure that the multi-cultural drama was presented accurately and to conceptualise engagement in a universal manner. Engagement as human energy in the system to perform “What is suppressed for too long will come out as a cry.” CG Jung, 1973

In this part of the chapter the underlying theoretical building blocks that emerged from the grounded theory study of Viljoen24 are presented. The concepts of inclusion and a culture of inclusion are described. Inclusivity is defined as a radical methodology that unleashes energy that can manifest in the form of engagement, apathy or disengagement. The theoretical constructs that can be viewed as prerequisites for inclusivity, and ultimately sustainability, are presented.

Concepts of inclusion, a climate of inclusion and inclusivity Inclusion is not a separate activity. It’s an integral part of the things we do day in and day out. When you talk about a performance appraisal, you build in Inclusion; when you give feedback, when you talk about goal setting and salary, you build in Inclusion. That’s the next level.25

The concept of inclusion was originally found in the roots of educational psychology as described by Kraft & Sakofs,26 Erickson;27 Spindler and Spindler28 and Russel.29 LeBeron30 describes a climate of inclusion. Miller and Katz31 also added an organisational 41

Employee engagement in a South African context

development lens to explore a culture of inclusion. According to Hyter and Turnock,32 inclusion unlocks potential and production capabilities in workplaces. The antithesis of a concept often assists in delimiting it. Exclusion in business decisionmaking impacts negatively on people productivity and increases resistance to change, Faqua and Newman explain.33 Botha and Schutte explain that indifference may occur when relationship credibility is negatively impacted.34 This happens when respect, support ownership and trust deteriorate. Viljoen uniquely positions inclusivity as:35 A radical organisational, transformational methodology which aligns the doing and the being side of the organisation around commonly defined principles and values, co-created by all. It is a systemic approach that focuses on underlying beliefs and assumptions and challenges patterns within the individual, group and organisational psyche to expend energy and engage in a sustainable, inclusive manner with the purpose of achieving shared consciousness.

It can be added that: “Inclusivity results in the unleashing of human energy to perform the task at hand.” Through a process of inclusivity, human energy is unleashed in the system that can be wired around organisational doing (strategy) or tasks at hand. This human energy can take on the forms of different archetypes, namely engaged, indifferent and disengaged. An archetype in itself contains specific patterns, behaviours or properties. Jung explained that archetypes contain repeating patterns of thought and action that re-appear time and again across diverse settings.36 Engagement conceptualised “Individual engagement to a group effort – that is what makes a team work, a company work, a society work, a civilization work”. Vince Lombardi What is engagement? Engagement may be described as “the act of committing, pledging or engaging oneself”37 or “a heightened emotional connection that an employee feels for his or her organisation, that influences him or her to exert greater discretionary effort to his or her work”.38 Macey and Schneider’s definition of employee engagement is accepted as a working definition for individual engagement.39 However, a more elaborate, integral and inclusive approach is followed here.

42

Chapter 3: Engagement in multi-cultural environments: Reflections and theoretical development

Viljoen refers to organisational engagement as “the systemic result of the interplay between the individual potential, group potential and organisational potential in the context of the specific industry or over-culture”, and as “the output of human energy in the system to perform”.40 Employees who engage are present, take personal authority, focus on the here and now, and make their voices heard, even when speaking up is not popular. The level of human energy then correlates directly with business indicators such as productivity, production, safe behaviour, customer-centricity, talent retention and others. The author builds on the notion of Benson, who argues that the true meaning of commitment is the ability to commit with passion to a noble pursuit, and defines engagement as: “the act of committing, pledging or engaging oneself” or “the state of being bound emotionally or intellectually to a course of action or to another person or persons”.41 In this chapter “engagement” refers to the amount of human energy in the system that will result in different levels of engagement; it is positioned as the causal effect of a systemic interplay of various factors on multiple levels. In short, engagement in the OCD sense refers to the human energy in a system to perform the task at hand. The human energy is unleashed in a synthesis of the optimisation of individual and group dynamics, with enabling organisational dynamics in congruence with over-cultural dynamics. Organisations with innate capacity to create human energy in the form of engagement, through inclusivity, will distinguish themselves as sustainable, competitive and adaptive organisations. The benefit of an engaged workforce Typically, the salary bill in an organisation contributes to 60%–80% of overall costs. If the optimal level of human energy in the system to perform is not unleashed, there is a process loss – the maximum return on investment in human capital is not realised. It is the task of leadership to create a behavioural framework wherein the maximum number of employees can engage the maximum amount of energy in terms of the strategy and the values of the organisation, and where, through involvement and participation, tacit knowledge and wisdom can be unleashed and aligned.42 The Corporate Leadership Council, for example, found that internationally only 28% of identified talent was engaged.43 This means that 72% of human capital in organisations did not bring their gifts to the metaphoric organisational table. In a sample group of more than 50 000 participants in a BeQ study in emerging economies, the author found a more alarming rate of engagement. Here only 20% of participants indicated levels of human energy that could be described as engaged. It seems that the loss in human energy is even higher in diverse organisational spaces. The BeQ is introduced below as a culturally sensitive instrument that describes the willingness of individuals to engage. The important question that should be kept in mind by leaders of organisations must 43

Employee engagement in a South African context

be: How do we ensure that the most expensive, yet most valuable, resource in the organisation – people – engages?

The BeQ philosophy as a multi-cultural alternative The focus of the BeQ The primary objectives of the BeQ are the following: (i) exploring the relations between perceptions that influence organisational engagement and the unleashing of individual voices (ii) understanding the underlying assumptions as they pertain to the individual, the group, the organisation and the greater organisation (iii) determining the level of engagement and thus the human energy within the organisation to perform (iv) describing over-cultural dynamics and considering the implications thereof on the organisation44 Constructs that the BeQ describes The BeQ describes the following engagement constructs by considering the multicultural interpretation of the various subconstructs on individual, group, organisational and over-cultural domains. The questionnaire is customised to measure the unique business needs that present themselves to the leaders of the organisation, and to include dynamics unique to the country in which the organisation operates. The BeQ model is presented in figure 3.1.

The individual

The team

Worldview Assumptions about Me Climate Assumptions about We

The organisation

Culture Assumptions about They

Respect Regard Resilience Personal responsibility Competence Support Leadership Flexibility Valuing diversity Accountability Trust Alignment Adaptability Inclusivity Ethics

Figure 3.1 The Benchmark of Engagement Model (adapted from Viljoen (2015))45

44

Chapter 3: Engagement in multi-cultural environments: Reflections and theoretical development

It is not the purpose in this chapter to define the various constructs and subconstructs of the BeQ module.iv The reader is reminded of the following: • •

•

•

•

•

•

It is not the definition of the subconstruct of the author that is important, but what the specific participant in a BeQ enquiry places on a construct. The over-cultural dynamic indicated by the encompassing oval in figure 3.2 plays an influential role at individual, group and organisational level and therefore should always be considered in interpreting engagement enquiry results. OCD theory warns against simplistic solutions and asks practitioners to study individual, group and organisational dynamics in the context of the over-cultural influences. The interplay between the various constructs and subconstructs in the BeQ model unleashes human energy in the system that can be wired around organisational doing as displayed in figure 3.2. As a systemic interplay and combination of subconstructs on various domains create a perception about me, we, they, them and us, simplistic tools and interventions will not have systemic results in influencing underling beliefs and assumptions in the total system. The BeQ instrument has a reliability of 0.78 on the employee engagement component.46 Four questions that increased the reliability to psychometric properties were replaced by organisational questions that the company can pose itself due to the sensitivity of organisations to the impact of time constraints on participation in a large number of questions. It is generally accepted that r=0.4 is acceptable for a perception study.47 Validity and equivalence were based on the analysis of covariance structures within the BeQ framework. Asking participants whether the research findings are authentic and hold true for them, in their context, ensures face validity.

In figure 3.2 the systemic interplay between assumptions about the me, the we, they, them and us are graphically displayed. To unleash the maximum amount of human energy in the system the mechanics between the different domains should be synergetic and congruent. Process loss of human energy in the system can occur if individual, group and organisational dynamics are not optimised and are not congruent with overcultural dynamics. The human energy in the system can be categorised and presented by archetypes of engagement, indifference or disengagement.

iv The subconstructs and constructs are conceptualised and defined by Viljoen (2015) in Inclusive

Organisational Transformation.

45

Employee engagement in a South African context

Assumptions about Us

Assumptions about We

Assumptions about Me

The individual Engagement

The team

The organisation

Assumptions about Them Over-cultural context Figure 3.2 Systemic interplay of dynamics on various domains (adapted from Viljoen (2015))48

In figure 3.2 the systemic interrelations between the human energy unleashed on individual level, the synergetic emphasis of the team domain and the organisational cultural practices and culture are displayed. The more congruent this interconnectedness is with the over-cultural context, the more human energy there will be available in the organisation to wire around organisational doing and being. The opposite also applies – there can be impactful human loss if there is incongruence on any of these domains or in the synthesis between them. Levels of engagement Virtuous cycles of energy that manifest in engagement “Individual commitment to a group effort is what makes a team work, a company work, a society work, a civilisation work.” Vince Lombardi Engagement is described by the Random House Unabridged Dictionary49 as “the act of committing, pledging or engaging oneself”; where commitment can be defined as “the state of being bound emotionally or intellectually to a course of action or to another person or persons”, according to the American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language.50 WordNet51 defines commitment as “the trait of sincere and steadfast fixity of purpose, a man of energy and commitment” and “the act of binding oneself to a course of action”. In this approach engagement results in commitment.

46

Chapter 3: Engagement in multi-cultural environments: Reflections and theoretical development

Social Identification Theory (SIT) literature, as described by Brown, Condor, Mathews, Wade and Williams;52 Hennessy and West;53 Hinkle, Taylor and Fox-Cardomone;54 Van Knippenberg;55 and Booysen,56 investigates how organisational behaviour, especially identification, translates into engagement. This highlights the importance of inclusivity in multi-cultural settings even more. In systems that can be described as engaged, there is human energy that will manifest in customer-centricity, productivity, employee satisfaction and other business indicators. The benefits of engagement can be seen in figure 3.3. Level of engagement

Correlates directly to: Virtuous Cycle:

Vicious Cycle:

Unleashing voice Productivity Staff retention Employee satisfaction Creativity and innovation Value-based behaviour Customer experience Safe behaviour

Disengagement Absenteeism Staff turnover Apathy Low morale Negative behaviour Poor service delivery Incidents and accidents

Figure 3.3 The impact of engagement on business results (Viljoen (2008))

Being indifferent or apathetic Apathy sets in when there is not enough human energy in a system to perform. Engagement then fails to manifest, and a climate of indifference is the order of the day. The Random House Unabridged Dictionary57 defines apathy as “the absence or suppression of passion, emotion or excitement and the lack of interest in or concern for things which others find moving or exciting”. The Kernerman English Multilingual Dictionary58 describes apathy as “the lack of interest or enthusiasm”; while the American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language59 describes the term as “the lack of interest or concern regarding matters of general importance and the lack of emotion or feeling, impassiveness” and the term “indifference” as “an individual’s unresponsiveness to aspects of emotional, social or physical life.” In an organisation that is indifferent, there is not enough human energy to sustain the status quo and levels of engagement will experience entropy and decline over time if no intervention is done.

47

Employee engagement in a South African context

Vicious cycles of low human systemic energy – disengaged The antithesis of engagement is detachment or a sense of being disconnected. This state is defined by the Random House Unabridged Dictionary60 as “the condition of being detached, aloofness from the concerns of others”. Synonyms for detachment include indifference, unconcern or coolness. The American Heritage Stedman’s Medical Dictionary61 defines detachment as “the act or process of disconnecting or detaching, separation, indifference to or remoteness from the concerns of others, aloofness, and the absence of prejudice or bias, disinterest”; whereas WordNet62 defines the concept as “avoiding emotional involvement, the act of releasing from an attachment or connection and coming apart (separation)”. In a system where detachment is visible, the interplay between individual, group, organisational and societal dynamics is vicious and manifests in a vicious cycle that has a negative effect on business implications. In systems that are vicious, business indicators are compromised, employee turnover increases, go-slows and strikes happen and production, safety indicators and customer satisfaction decline significantly (see figure 3.3). The BeQ delimited The BeQ is not a one-time measure of where an organisation finds itself. Instead it is a philosophy of how to rewire the energy in a system in a positive way, taking diverse worldviews into account. It is inclusive, and therefore the underlying methodology may be cooperative enquiry63 or appreciative enquiry.64 Ultimately, adapting a philosophy like this impacts on behaviour, and Viljoen65 explains that as behavioural change is required, namely to become inclusive and to unleash voices, it can be viewed as a radical organisational transformation process. The BeQ methodology is not a quick check but rather an organisational development process. It provides benchmarks over time – a system can determine how it has grown and how underlying beliefs in the system have shifted. On the other hand, it provides a methodology to compare various different operations in multi-cultural settings. Factorial validity was determined for the BeQ subscales to test for the equivalence of the constructs and the theoretical structure of the model.66 Quantitative and qualitative findings are compared and face validity is ensured as research findings are tested with participants to determine if the researchers’ findings hold true for the specific environment; in this way triangulation takes place. Unique properties of the BeQ philosophy The BeQ is deeply interwoven with the philosophy of inclusivity. If implemented correctly it can be viewed as a radical organisational transformational process as it results in behavioural change. Voices are unleashed and workers are not scared to

48

Chapter 3: Engagement in multi-cultural environments: Reflections and theoretical development

speak up about things at work that are important to them. It is a systemic addition to the field of organisational development not only as a diagnostic methodology, but also an organisational change methodology. Effort is made not to duplicate actions already implemented in the system. It does not create dependency on consultants, as internal HR practitioners are accredited in the process, and are involved from the start. Skills are transferred to ensure that there is enough capability inside the organisation to maintain momentum between physical pre- and post-BeQ measurements. Human energy in the system is wired around things that made individuals and organisations good in the first place. It normalises. People feel that they are heard, and that others experience similar issues. Often the unions appreciate it as they are involved from the start and their workers are consulted. Even community leaders are supportive of a process that is implemented from the organisational side to improve the way in which things are done in the organisation. The multi-cultural properties of the BeQ philosophy make it unique. In the next chapter the human niche or spiral dynamics theory is introduced, together with other multicultural approaches, to ensure that engagement enquiries consider over-cultural dynamics. Systemic implications of the BeQ The BeQ is time-consuming as its philosophy is to listen to involve and solicit the ideas of everyone. Initially issues such as salaries will be on the table until the real issues come to the fore. A language is adapted – a positive one – and the organisation is re-authored. A shared language is developed that binds executives and cleaners together in a collective attempt to do what is best for the whole. It creates hope. As discussed above, creating hope can negatively impact on organisational culture if it is not fulfilled. This will lead to deep disappointment that may result in strikes, go-slows or even resignations. The BeQ process can overcome this cynicism and unleash the human energy in the system to perform. Conducting a BeQ study The BeQ data may be gathered in various ways. The most important is to find the method that will serve the culture best. The first option is the web-based method. The benefit of web-based options is that a link is forwarded to an individual. It is answered, and as it is web-based, the data is captured immediately on the on-line database. Information is anonymous. However, internal firewalls in organisations often reject requests to complete online forms. Further, if trust in the organisation is compromised, individuals may be reluctant to complete a form that they feel can be traced back to them.67

49

Employee engagement in a South African context

Another option is to use hard copies (paper) to gather both quantitative and qualitative data. It is easy to administer and can be done even in the middle of the night before a shift starts. No computer stations are needed and it also seems to be reliable. Sometimes language may become an issue and if a translator is needed it may take a bit of time. It is important that translators are trained in the concept, or else what they say and what the facilitator says have very different meanings. Not everyone can write, and participants may feel a bit vulnerable when requested to do so. However, the researcher may be able to sense by the unconscious body language where the group finds itself. It is critical that the researcher is unbiased and well trained in the methodology and concepts. Further, if a translator is used, it is critical to ensure that he or she has a clear understanding of the constructs and translates them accurately without portraying his or her own opinions and without influencing the group in any way. Clickers or remotes can be used to vote. Teams often enjoy this. One is able to see here which questions spark attention and which have no impact. Overall, this is a great method as data is captured immediately and human error is minimised. Applications on smartphones may also be used, but as these are not available in some environments they are only effective in particular markets. Focus groups are not ideal for doing this type of enquiry as it is important to hear all the voices, and in collective environments it is often counterproductive. If it has to be done in a focus group, all participants must have the opportunity to write down their personal opinions, and from there must be led into a group conversation. Often, translators are needed in focus groups. One must, however, be careful that, for example, the translator does not influence the group with his or her personal opinion or that a union member does not claim the space to speak about union-related issues. As a rule of thumb, not more than eight people from diverse spaces should participate in such a focus group.68 In-depth interviews of a phenomenological nature can be used, especially at higher levels, with union members, elders and key players in the organisation. Rich data is often derived in this way. One will be surprised at how much people may observe at a lower level in the organisation, and what wisdom can be manifested during these interviews. Such interviews have the additional benefit that, if the leader has been interviewed, he or she may motivate the rest of the team to participate as well. Qualitative data that is gathered in this way is content analysed. First, open coding is done and themes that emerge are identified. Thereafter, axial coding that explores causality is conducted. Ultimately a systemic diagram is presented and supported by a narrative story of the case organisation.

50

Chapter 3: Engagement in multi-cultural environments: Reflections and theoretical development

Design principles of a multi-cultural BeQ session Specific design principles for the BeQ are discussed in this part of the chapter: how the maximum participation during the quantitative and qualitative data-gathering phase can be achieved and how the feedback must be given to be credible and authentic and to fit. How to ensure maximum participation during the qualitative and quantitative datagathering phases The quantitative phase is sometimes impacted by the very engagement dynamics that manifest in the organisation. Especially, if trust is low, participants report a fear that electronic responses can be tracked. In sessions where clickers are used to capture responses, the group dynamic becomes obvious. Field notes can be made by the researcher and later analysed. Reactions to different questions can be recorded. It is advisable that the leadership of the organisation clearly communicates the importance of hearing the voice of the people, and that the intent to listen is confirmed. The purpose of the enquiry must be shared, confidentiality of the responses must be ensured and how feedback will be dealt with must be contracted. The internal HR department can assist with scheduling sessions. Progress feedback should be provided daily to ensure the participation of all the identified business units. During the qualitative phase it is important that first the leadership and then the group that is participating in the enquiry agree on the following principles, to ensure that the benefits of inclusivity are manifested: • •

• • • • •

What is said in a session must contextually stay in that session – only the story may be taken out of the sacred space. If a specific story needs to be addressed the facilitator cannot be the one who takes the operational responsibility, but he or she may assist the employee in making the story heard. If someone gives input, he or she must receive feedback too. No promises may be made. Small quick gains may be shared. The conversation must focus on the task at hand. Time, space and content boundaries should be managed properly. Leadership may open a session but it is often best if they do not stay for the full session – especially if it is a verbal session. There are no holy cows – any topic may be discussed.

The facilitator must make meticulous notes to ensure that everyone feels heard. Space must be created for group members who still want to contribute to the enquiry after the session. Open-space technology works well for soliciting anonymous data over a period of time.69 Alternatively, participants can write personal inputs on post-it pads and

51

Employee engagement in a South African context .

stick them in a special location, send e-mail inputs to an e-mail account created for this purpose or speak to their HR practitioner. People who participate must receive feedback During the sharing of the information it is critical not to speak down to the workers or use oversimplified language. Metaphor can be used with great effect. Often leaders assume that it is preferable not to speak about business issues that workers will not understand, saying it is better that they do not understand everything, than feel judged as not being clever enough to grasp business concepts. However, one would be very surprised at the wisdom that is found in the collective. The purpose here is to listen with eyes closed. Another design principle is that everyone who participates in the conversations is entitled to feedback. This practice gives credibility to the process.

CONCLUSION The focus of inclusivity is to ensure that voices in the organisations are unleashed and that the optimal number of employees engage in organisational tasks and invest the maximum amount of energy in terms of the strategy and values of the organisation. Through inclusivity tacit knowledge is shared and soft and even silent voices are heard as committed individuals engage in the organisational doing and being. Through a process of inclusivity all employees can align their individual values and performance with the values and performance of the organisation. Congruence in terms of doing and being in organisations is critical and may be achieved through the methodology of inclusivity. By translating BeQ results through the system in an inclusive manner and by co-creating action plans to enhance the dynamics identified, knowing is also created. Understanding of what has to be done must be shared. Using a multi-culturally sensitive process of inclusivity, high levels of engagement will manifest with the corresponding benefits in business indicators. It is the task of leaders on all levels in the organisation to optimise engagement in the individual, the group and the organisational domain that is congruent with over-cultural dynamics. Customers and other external stakeholders who interact with the organisation soon sense the transformation that engagement unleashes from within. Jung stated “as within so without”.70 In the chapter 6 the human niche or spiral dynamics theory is presented as a way of describing the over-cultural dynamics in multi-cultural settings. Insights gained into engagement studies conducted in various countries are shared.

52

Chapter 4 The current state of employee engagement in South Africa by Nico Martins

INTRODUCTION In 2014 The South African Board for People Practices (SABPP) reported in their October fact sheet on the status of employee engagement in South Africa. According to SABPP, employee engagement is a very important concept for HR practitioners, because it is an outcome indicator that provides evidence of the health of the leadership climate and of how well various components of the organisation’s processes, including HR processes, are functioning in relation to employees’ perceptions of the psychological contract between each employee and the organisation.1 The impact of employee engagement and the theoretical concepts underpinning engagement have been discussed in previous chapters. What is important for South Africa practitioners is to understand that there is a difference between employee engagement and work engagement. In many instances consultants, HR practitioners and researchers treat employee engagement and work engagement the same way. According to Schaufeli and Salanova,2 employee engagement is a broader concept than work engagement: the former may include the employee’s professional or occupational role and his or her relationship with the organisation, while work engagement refers to the (individual) employee’s work. A second aspect that needs to be considered when measuring employee or work engagement is which definition, model and measure are used. Nienaber and Martins mention areas of concern such as whether it is a passing fad; various definitions; the dimensions to identify engagement; different explanations of the construct; the separate existence of work and employee engagement; when engagement becomes damaging to employees’ health and work-life balance; and the validity of the instruments used.3 Given the above concerns it is also of crucial importance to be sure that the instruments are applicable to the South Africa population. The development of a South African measurement tool and the reporting of South African results are the focus of this chapter.

53

Employee engagement in a South African context

The measurement of engagement Nienaber and Martins reviewed and investigated the business and organisational psychology databases for articles (in English) pertaining to employee engagement at both the individual and organisational levels.4 The databases searched were Proquest, EbscoHost, Emerald and SABINET, and sources from the Chartered Institute of Personnel Development (CIPD) were consulted. The search yielded a total of 921 possible articles, of which 53 met the inclusion criteria for the construct of “engagement” at the individual, unit and/or organisational levels and/or its measurement and/or validation of engagement measuring instruments. A further 170 textbooks and 76 dissertations/ theses were discovered. The researchers decided to use the framework of Macy and Schneider as portrayed in figure 4.1 as a starting point for their research on employee engagement.5 Trait engagement (positive views of life and work) Proactive personality Autotelic personality Trait positive effect Conscientiousness

State engagement (feelings of energy, absorption) Satisfaction (affective) Involvement Commitment Empowerment

Behavioural engagement (extra-role behaviour) OCB Proactive/personal initiative Role expansion Adaptive

Trust

Work attributes, variety, challenge autonomy

Transformational leadership

Organisational vision, mission, goals (purpose, strategy to achieve the goals, competitive advantage anchoring strategy)

Figure 4.1: Engagement framework6

According to Macey and Schneider,7 “their framework shows that engagement as a disposition (ie, trait engagement can be regarded as an inclination or orientation) to experience the world from a particular vantage point (eg positive affectivity characterized by feelings of enthusiasm) and that this trait engagement gets reflected in psychological state engagement”.8 54

Chapter 4: The current state of employee engagement in South Africa

Their framework furthermore indicates that the work conditions in the work have direct and indirect effects on state and behavioural engagement. The framework of Macey and Schneider was adapted to include the organisational level.9 What is important to the South African practitioner is the role of trust (discussed in chapter 5) and transformational leadership, which are consequently influenced by the organisational vision, mission, goals (purpose), strategy to achieve the goals, competitive advantage and anchoring strategy. These antecedents influence engagement, which in turn has an impact on consequences and thus organisational performance.10 A number of research instruments are currently available to measure engagement from different perspectives. Table 4.1 provides an overview of research conducted from 1990 to 2014 focusing on engagement. Table 4.1: Examples of selected studies focusing on “engagement” 1990–2014 Author(s/ Researchers

Purpose of the study/measuring instrument

Dimensions and main constructs

Method/ analysis

Key findings*

• Meaningfulness - task characteristics - role characteristics - work interactions • Psychological safety - interpersonal relationships - group and intergroup dynamics - management style and process - organisational norms • Psychological availability - physical energy - emotional energy - insecurity - outside life

In-depth interviews; grounded theory

Three psychological conditions (meaningfulness, safety and availability) are identified. These concepts help to explain the variance in people’s bringing to and leaving out aspects of themselves in their work-role performances.

Conceptual papers Kahn, 1990

To conceptualise personal engagement by exploring the working conditions in which people personally engage and disengage

55

Employee engagement in a South African context

Author(s/ Researchers

Purpose of the study/measuring instrument

Dimensions and main constructs

Method/ analysis

Macey & Schneider, 2008

Developed a theoretical framework

Developed a • Trait engagement theoretical (positive views framework of life and work), proactive personality, autotelic personality trait, positive effect, conscientiousness • State engagement (feelings of energy, absorption), satisfaction (affective), involvement, commitment, empowerment • Behavioural engagement (extrarole behaviour), OCB, proactive/ personal initiative, role expansion, adaptive • Trust • Transformational leadership • Work attributes (variety, challenge, autonomy)

Key findings*

They offer propositions about the effects of job attributes and leadership as main effects on state and behavioural engagement and as moderators of the relationships among the three facets of engagement. They conclude with thoughts about the measurement of the three facets of engagement and potential antecedents, especially measurement via employee surveys.

Developing and validating engagement measurement instruments Schaufeli et al., 2002, 2006

56

UWES identified three subdimensions of engagement: vigour, dedication, absorption; characteristics of engagement are more persistent and pervasive; affective-cognitive psychological state

17-item scale • vigour (6), • dedication (5), • absorption (6) Nine-item scale • vigour (3), • dedication (3), • absorption (3)

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA); Multiplegroup CFA

Confirmed UWES (17- and nine-item scales) validity and reliability as a representative instrument of engagement in multi-national cultural contexts and samples

Chapter 4: The current state of employee engagement in South Africa

Author(s/ Researchers

Purpose of the study/measuring instrument

Dimensions and main constructs

May et al., 2004

To test Kahn’s (1990) conceptualisation of engagement by examining the determinants and mediating effects of three psychological conditions (meaningfulness, safety and availability) on engagement at work

Questionnaire; • Psychological path analysis engagement (13) • Psychological meaningfulness (6) • Psychological safety (3) • Psychological availability (5) • Job enrichment (15) • Work-role fit (4) • Rewarding coworker relations (10) • Supportive supervision relations (10) • Co-worker norm adherence (3) • Resources (8) • Self-consciousness (3) • Outside activities (11)

Among the three psychological conditions, meaningfulness displays the strongest relation to engagement. The relationships of job enrichment and work-role fit to engagement are partially mediated by psychological safety.

Questionnaire; Structural equation modelling

Empirical evidence that service climate, job satisfaction and affective commitment influence work engagement; work engagement is conceptualised as a multidimensional higher-order construct that exhibits a superior fit than a simple first-order conceptualisation

Barnes & To contribute to Collier, 2013 the developing literature on work engagement by studying antecedents, outcomes and measurement, specifically in a services environment

Used existing measures to construct a 42-item instrument: • Work engagement • Service climate • Job satisfaction • Affective commitment • Adaptability • Career commitment

Method/ analysis

Key findings*

Model developed: Path-analytic framework of engagement

57

Employee engagement in a South African context

Author(s/ Researchers

Purpose of the study/measuring instrument

Dimensions and main constructs

Method/ analysis

Key findings*

Validating engagement measurement instruments Storm & Rothman, 2003

• Work engagement Self-report scale – UWES (24 questionnaire to items consisting of assess work vigour, dedication engagement (UWES) and absorption)

Structural equation modelling

Structural equation modelling confirms a three-factor model of work engagement consisting of vigour, dedication and absorption.

Balducci, Fraccaroli & Schaufeli, 2010

Validating the nine- • Vigour factor UWES (Italian) • Dedication • Absorption

Multiple-group confirmatory factor analyses

The Italian version of the UWES-9 behaves consistently with the original Dutch version

Christian et al., 2011

To test the model of Macey & Schneider (2008)

Meta-analytic path modelling (the data suggests that Macey & Schneider’s (2008) assertion appears to have merit: rather than being merely a blend of “old wines”, engagement also has characteristics of “new wines”).

The path model suggests that task variety and task significance appear to be related to engagement. They found tentative evidence that leadership is related to work engagement and work engagement is related to job performance.

Exploratory factor analysis; CFA

Supports a multi-factorial conceptualisation of the construct

• • • • • • • • • •

Mills et al., 2012

58

Autonomy Task variety Task significance Feedback Transformational leadership Conscientiousness Positive affect Work engagement Task performance Contextual performance

Validating UWES 17- • Vigour and nine-item scale • Dedication • Absorption

Chapter 4: The current state of employee engagement in South Africa

Author(s/ Researchers

Purpose of the study/measuring instrument

Dimensions and main constructs

Method/ analysis

Viljavec et al., 2012

Investigated validity of UWES and May et al. 2004 scale measuring engagement

Questionnaire; UWES (vigour, dedication and CFA and SEM absorption) May et al. 2004 (cognitive, emotional and physical)

Imandim, Bisschoff & Botha, 2014

Development of a model to measure employee engagement

• Cognitive drivers • Emotional engagement • Behavioural engagement • Feeling valued and involved • Having an engaged leadership team • Trust and integrity • Nature of my job • The connection between individual and company performance • Career growth opportunities • Stress-free environment • Change management

Developed a theoretical model; exploratory factor analysis, reliability analysis; multi-variate statistical analysis

Key findings*

Some evidence for convergent, discriminant and predictive validity was found for both scales, although neither showed discriminant validity with regard to job satisfaction. Overall, the three factors of the UWES performed slightly better across analyses than the three factors from the May, Gilson & Harter (2004) measure. Adapted empirical model to measure employee engagement in SA

59

Employee engagement in a South African context

Author(s/ Researchers

Purpose of the study/measuring instrument

Laschinger & To test a theoretical Leiter, 2006 model of professional nurses’ work environments linking conditions for professional nursing practice to burnout/ engagement and nurses’ reports of adverse patient events

Dimensions and main constructs

Method/ analysis

Questionnaire; • Strong leadership SEM (4) • RN/MD collaboration (9) • Policy involvement (3) • Staffing adequacy (4) • Nursing model of care (8) • Emotional exhaustion (9) • Depersonalisation (5) • Personal accomplishment (8) • Adverse events (multi-analysis question)

Key findings*

Burnout partially mediates the relationship between worklife factors and adverse events. A work environment with higher support for professional practice results in higher engagement and ultimately safer patient care.

Studies testing engagement and related concepts Salanova et al., 2005

60

To test the mediating role of service climate between the antecedents (organisational resources and work engagement) and employee performance and customer loyalty

SEM • Organisational resources (training, autonomy, technology) (11) • Service climate (4) • Work engagement – UWES (vigour, dedication, absorption) (17) • Employee performance (6) • Customer loyalty (3)

A full mediation model in which organisational resources and work engagement predict service climate, which in turn predicts employee performance and customer loyalty, is supported.

Chapter 4: The current state of employee engagement in South Africa

Author(s/ Researchers

Purpose of the study/measuring instrument

Dimensions and main constructs

Method/ analysis

Key findings*

Hakanen et al., 2006

To test a model with two parallel processes of workrelated wellbeing among teachers: an energetic process and a motivational process

• Work engagement – UWES (vigour, dedication, absorption) (17) • Burnout and ill health (10) • Job demands and resources – eight dimensions (20) • Organisational commitment (2)

Questionnaire; SEM

Burnout mediates the effect of high job demands on ill health, work engagement mediates the effects of job resources on organisational commitment and burnout mediates the effects of a lack of resources on low work engagement.

Llorens et al., 2006

To simultaneously test the job– demands–resource model in two countries by using different occupational samples

• Work engagement Questionnaire; SEM – UWES (vigour, dedication, absorption) (17) • Quantitative overload (3) • Emotional overload (3) • Job control (5) • Social support (5) • Performance feedback (3) • Organisational commitment (4) • Burnout (9) Based on Spanish questionnaire

The hypothesis is partially supported: burnout partially mediates the effect of job demands on organisational commitment and work engagement partially mediates the effect of job resources on organisational commitment.

61

Employee engagement in a South African context

Author(s/ Researchers

Purpose of the study/measuring instrument

Dimensions and main constructs

Method/ analysis

Key findings*

Hallberg et al., 2007

To examine the effects of type-A behaviour patterns on burnout and work engagement

• Autonomy • Workload • Achievement striving • Irritability/ impatience • Work engagement – UWES (9) • Emotional exhaustion – burnout • Cynicism – burnout

Questionnaire, hierarchical regression analysis

Type-A behaviour and work engagement share only 13% of common variance; no significant interactions between type-A behaviour and workload.

Note: * may be influenced by type/kind of sample (e.g. probability vs nonprobability like convenience); ( ) = no. of items if available. Adapted from Nienaber & Martins11 and Simpson12

Table 4.1 highlights the different purposes of measuring engagement, the dimensions used, the method/analysis and the key findings. It is clear from this summary that the purposes of measurement vary greatly, although most studies focus on some aspect(s) of engagement, and that different constructs are applied when measuring engagement. Different dimensions are measured and the key findings differ due to the methods applied to analyse the data and the different contexts in which the assessments were done. In a number of instances SEM was used to confirm the theoretical models developed. An interesting observation is that in most instances, existing questionnaires or measuring instruments were combined to measure employee engagement. Only one South African study by Imandim, Bisschoff & Botha was detected in which a South African engagement model was developed.13

The development of an employee engagement index The researchers started with a pool of 91 items that had to be measured, as reflected by the existing theory and after investigating other research as indicated in table 4.1.14 The items included in the first draft of the questionnaire were discussed with knowledgeable experts in the fields of industrial and organisational psychology and HR to ensure face and content validity of the constructs.15 A number of items were subsequently rephrased, added or deleted, leaving a pool of 82 items.16 The questionnaire was then validated in two follow-up studies. The first study involved 399 employees of all levels of a typical South African organisation. During this phase of the project the questionnaire was also pre-tested with employees from different occupations and demographic profiles. This was to ensure that the participants understood the questions. Subsequently a few 62

Chapter 4: The current state of employee engagement in South Africa

questions were rephrased or dropped from the questionnaire, leaving 71 questions for the statistical validation. During this phase of validation only 42 questions were retained after conducting the validation and reliability analysis.17 The second study used a much broader sample across organisations and industries. A total of 1 073 completed questionnaires was received. The database of a research company, which is made up of 285 000 businesspeople from various industries reflecting the profile of the South African working population, was used in this study. Only electronic surveys were used, consisting of mass e-mail invitations over a period of three weeks. Each potential respondent received a personalised e-mail, stating the purpose of the investigation and inviting them to participate in the survey on a voluntary, confidential and anonymous basis. To confirm the validity of the questionnaire, CFA in SEM was subsequently applied. The final results of the analysis confirmed that all six factors (strategy and implementation; customer service; team level; immediate manager; organisational satisfaction; organisational commitment) contribute to the overall construct of employee engagement as defined in this study. The results also show evidence of the internal consistency of the components/ dimensions. Consequently the measurement instrument can be considered rigorous.18 Tendencies emerging from South African results In 2014 and 2015 the database of a research company, which is made up of 285 000 businesspeople from various industries reflecting the profile of the South African working population, was again used to determine the engagement levels of employees in the South African business environment. The comparative results for the three studies are portrayed in table 4.2: Table 4.2: Overall engagement survey scores for the three surveys

Dimensions

2014 – March N=1073 Mean

2014 – Dec N=4125

2015 – Sept N=4099

% Agree

Mean

% Agree

Mean

% Agree

Team

4.00

82

4.05

83

4.05

84

Organisational satisfaction

3.74

70

3.76

70

3.80

73

Customer service

3.68

67

3.72

68

3.72

68

Organisational commitment

3.67

65

3.70

68

3.73

66

Immediate manager

3.48

59

3.54

60

3.58

62

Strategy and implementation

3.33

54

3.38

55

3.40

57

OVERALL

3.66

67

3.70

61

3.73

61

63

Employee engagement in a South African context

It is interesting to note that the 2014 and 2015 overall results are very similar. The results of four dimensions are slightly more positive in 2015 and organisational commitment is slightly more negative. The five highest-ranked statements for 2015 are: • • • • •

In my team we do what is expected of us; we are dependable (89.3% agree). In my team we will finalise a task even if we experience difficulties (87.8% agree). In my team we adapt to changes (87.3% agree). I am proud to work for this organisation (86.8% agree). In my team we usually do more than is expected of us (86.6% agree).

All these statements are grouped under the dimension “team”. The ten lowest-ranked statements for 2015 are: • • • • • • • •

• •

Risk-taking is encouraged in the organisation. I am satisfied with the way that my work performance is evaluated. My immediate manager gives me regular feedback that helps me to improve my performance. In my organisation individual employees are involved in implementing the strategy of the organisation. The way we do things around here encourages high performance. The organisation has a stimulating environment. The organisational leadership gives employees a clear picture of the directions the organisation is headed in. My immediate manager does a good job of “managing the work” – that is, making appropriate work assignments, scheduling the work, setting priorities etc for me and my colleagues I am positive about my future in the organisation. In our organisation individual employees accept accountability for their performance.

It is interesting that the lowest-ranked statements are from the immediate manager (three) and strategy and implementation (six) and only one from organisational commitment.

Comparative results of demographic groups The overall results of the demographic groups are displayed in table 4.3. The results indicate the following for 2015: • • •

64

Generation Y is the most positive cohort overall. Males are overall significantly more positive than females. Top management is significantly more engaged than the other levels. The supervisory/ management levels are significantly more positive than employees.

Chapter 4: The current state of employee engagement in South Africa

• •

The 10-years-and-longer service group is the most positive of the service groups. Wholesale and retail and the financial groups are overall the most positive sectors and are also significantly more positive than mining and quarrying, water, electricity and construction.

Table 4.3: Overall results of the demographic groups Demographic group

Frequency

%

Overall mean

df

F

Sig

Generational group - Born between 1978 and 2000 - Born between 1965 and 1977 - Born between 1946 and 1964

1458 1730 911

35.8 42.2 22.2

3.81** 3.66* 3.64*

2

23.174

0.000

Gender - Male - Female

2387 1712

58.2 41.8

3.71** 3.68

1

6.175

0.013

Levels - Top management - Senior management - Manager - Supervisor - Employee

734 1149 1175 349 688

17.9 28.0 28.7 8.5 16.8

4.02** 3.75* 3.66* 3.57* 3.56*

4

83.407

0.000

Qualifications - Grades 12 and lower - Certificate - Diploma - First degree - Postgraduate

500 495 952 745 1404

12.9 12.1 23.2 18.2 34.3

3.75 3.63 3.74 3.66 3.72

4

3.175

0.013

Years of service - 0 to 1 year - 2 to 3 years - 4 to 5 years - 6 to 10 years - 10 years and longer

166 456 429 1006 2042

4.1 11.1 10.5 24.5 49.8

3.83 3.65 3.65 3.67 3.74

4

4.456

.001

563 616

13.7 15.0

3.72 3.62*

711 515 494

17.3 12.6 12.1

3.71 3.81** 3.59*

5

7.315

.000

1175

28.7

3.75**

Main industry/sector - Government institutions - Mining and quarrying, water, electricity and construction - Manufacturing - Wholesale and retail trade - Transport, storage and communication - Financial services

Notes: 1 = Years of service indicated a significant difference. However, due to the small ETA = .0043, no difference was detected between the years of service. 2 = Interpret η2 as a rule of thumb (Cohen: .01 ~ small,.09 ~ medium, .25 ~ large) ** indicates significantly more positive than *

65

Employee engagement in a South African context

The management of employee engagement in South Africa The results of the 2015 survey are very similar overall to the results of the 2014 survey. As in the 2014 survey, team work and organisational commitment are the most positive engagement dimensions. These two dimensions focus on individual assessment and team assessment of employee engagement. It is interesting to note that the lowestranked dimension focuses on strategy and implementation. Two of the lowest-ranked statements also refer to this dimension. It appears as if the dimension of strategy and implementation is regarded overall as an issue for South African participants. The second-lowest-ranked dimension is the immediate manager, with three statements ranked under the lowest-ranked five. It thus appears that the employee engagement items relating to these two dimensions are not contributing to the engagement of employees. As listed under the ten lowest-ranked statements, it appears as if the encouragement of risk; performance evaluation and feedback; the management of work by managers; involving employees in implementing the strategy; giving employees direction for the future; employees’ positiveness about their future in the organisation; and accepting responsibility for one’s own performance are obstacles to employee engagement in South Africa. It is concerning that six of the lowest-ranked statements are strategy and implementation-related. The current uncertainty in the electricity, manufacturing, mining and transport sectors is also reflected in the survey results. Employees in these sectors perceive their engagement at lower levels. It is important to note that with the exception of mining all the other sectors with low levels of engagement are government institutions.

CONCLUSION The results of the three engagement surveys provide a positive view of employees’ engagement levels in South Africa. It is, however, important to note that the profile of the sample group is mostly management, has either a diploma, a degree or a post-degree qualification, and has 10 years or more service. On the positive side this indicates that the leadership in organisations has high engagement levels and can thus cascade these positive perceptions and behaviour to employees on lower levels. What is, however, of concern is the low levels of engagement of the employee category and of employees in the mining, quarrying, water, electricity, construction and transport, storage and communication sectors. The results indicate that special attention needs to be given to these categories of employee to prevent industrial action, such as the country experienced in the mining industry in 2012. Anstey, in his evaluation of the reasons for the strike at Marikana, discovered that platinum mineworkers, for instance, earn relatively well in the South African context but revelations that mining CEOs may earn up to R55 000 a day (R20m per annum), and that the wage gap between a CEO

66

Chapter 4: The current state of employee engagement in South Africa

and a worker is 390:1 fuel both a sense of injustice and high aspirations.19 If top earners appear to be plundering resources, why not everyone else? This will have an impact on the engagement levels of employees on lower levels and also in certain industries. The results of the engagement surveys also indicate that management will have to involve employees at all levels more in the implementation of strategy in organisations and at the same time try to maintain the most positive engagement dimensions such as teamwork.

67

Chapter 5 Trust and engagement by Hartmut von der Ohe

TRUST AND ENGAGEMENT One of the questions that managers and HR specialists ask is: how do we ensure that our employees are engaged employees? They know what engagement is, they know what the advantages are, they would love their employees to be engaged but they have no idea how to get there. This chapter attempts to address this need through an alternative path, the path of increased trust, which, even if engagement is elusive for some reasons, will still have innumerable advantages for the organisation. As will become clear later, the antecedents to building or maintaining trust are the very same ones that are necessary for increased engagement. In their framework that attempts to explain the elements of employee engagement, Macey and Schneider1 assume that trust is an antecedent of behavioural engagement, the latter being defined as consisting of extra role behaviour such as OCB, proactive or personal initiative and role expansion. Leadership (specifically transformational leadership) has a direct effect on trust and therefore an indirect effect on engagement. Managers can therefore, through their leadership and managerial practices, influence their subordinates’ levels of trust in them.2 Not only is trust in the manager important but so is trust in the organisation, as employees expect that if they “contribute their time, talent and energy, they want to be sure that they are investing efforts in support of their organisation and they are making a wise decision and will not be cheated”, they gain a feeling of psychological safety3 and as such are not (unknowingly) put in conflicting situations concerning their family or co-workers.4 Similarly, interpersonal citizenship behaviour, which is behaviour linked to helping or supporting a co-worker or peer, is linked to co-worker trust and results in helping behaviour in return.5 A spiral of reciprocation and give-and-take OCB behaviour results, from which all parties gain advantage. This social exchange relationship is based on reciprocity, with its associated risk that the other party will not return the expected response.6 Various studies have found that trust either directly determines the levels of trust or mediates these levels, as employees have trouble being engaged if they do not trust the organisation they are employed by.7 Employees who trust management enough to speak out and are not afraid to give their opinion8 are also much more likely to exhibit employee engagement as a result of outstanding social exchange relationships with senior and line managers. 69

Employee engagement in a South African context

Trust as a topic has become very important in the current socio-economic environment. A number of very public scandals branded the twentieth century, starting with the oftenquoted Enron, WorldCom and Parmalat scandals, the demise of Arthur Andersen, one of the then major five global auditing firms,9 and the financial crash of 2008, including the liquidation of Lehman Brothers and the financial bail-out of major banks such as the Royal Bank of Scotland by governments with taxpayers’ money. These scandals destroyed or seriously eroded trust in institutions, and in bankers and financial advisors specifically.10 Waning trust is attributed to the fact that employees have become cynical in the face of re-engineering, pressures to perform and increased layoffs, while at the same time management receives bigger bonuses and shareholder pay-outs increase.11 The increasing wage gap between the lowest-paid workers and top management has in all probability also contributed to this scepticism. On a macro level there seems to be a difference in focus between the developing countries, where the focus is on using and improving social capital, and the developed richer countries where the focus is on loss of trust in major corporations, professionals and governments.12 Edelman reports that in contrast to the previous 14 years in which they conducted the global trust survey, a stronger distrust of state-owned companies than before now exists globally.13 Trust in organisations in BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China) scored the lowest in the world, while in South Africa only 17% of respondents trusted the government to do what is right. Edelman attributes this to highprofile public scandals in, for instance, Hong Kong and South Africa.14 After the financial sector crash in 2008, the banking sector unsurprisingly trails all other sectors as far as trust is concerned, and “with additional incidents this year, [is] facing continued public and regulatory reprimand over ethics, business practices and malfeasance”.15 In contrast, Nooteboom postulates that trust is probably much more prevalent in developing nations where it is often a necessary precondition for efficient organisational functioning.16 Institutional controls are not as manifest as in developed countries, where a more calculative approach is common. On a micro level, Edelman found that the general public placed the highest amount of trust in a company’s employees (36%), rather than in the chief executive officer (27%) or a media spokesperson (16%).17 When it came to organisational information, the most trusted sources of information were technical experts or academics (66% and 67% respectively). On an organisational level it was found that the largest effect trust has on positive organisational outcomes is its effect on individual performance, workplace satisfaction and OCB.18 Later Colquitt, Scott and LePine19 found that ability, benevolence and integrity (ABI) could predict trust and affective commitment, while Searle et al.20 summarise 70

Chapter 5: Trust and engagement

the state of knowledge on the outcomes of employee trust as improved individual work-related behaviour – not improved team or organisational performance, as this is probably affected to a greater extent by “felt trust” or the perception of being trusted. Another area where high trust has a positive effect involves an improved willingness to learn, to share information and to admit mistakes, thus encouraging innovation on the part of employees.21 The benefits of trust can be summarised as lower information-processing costs by individuals when they decide to trust somebody, increased satisfaction with the relationship under consideration and greater certainty about the other party’s behaviour.22 Productivity is also increased when workers find their workplace more satisfying as a result of being treated as adults who can be trusted to work towards a common goal.23 As trust is seen by many as an antecedent of employee engagement, which again has been linked to increased job performance through increased in-role and extra-role performance, employees accordingly only need to invest resources in activities that lead to positive personal and organisational outcomes.24 These are outcomes such as less role conflict and stress and less “cynicism about the organisation and its goals”, as employees feel they have more control over their work environment.25 In the next section the discussion moves from a macro perspective and indications of the amount of trust reported, to the more relevant outcomes of employee trust and the subsequent effects on employee engagement. But first some basic concepts have to be determined. The targets or foci of trust are known as trustees, while the individuals who are exposing themselves to risk and making themselves vulnerable are known as trustors.26 The level of trust is determined not only by the trustees’ perceived ABI, but also by the trustors’ propensity to trust. This propensity to trust is again dependent on the personality of the trustor. There are basically two types of trust in an organisational context when one differentiates according to the type of referent, or who the focus of the trust is. Firstly there is trust in others, such as trust in a supervisor or a manager, and secondly there is trust in the organisation as an entity.27 The focus is on employee trust within the context of work organisations. It is concerned with the currently popular topics of trust in virtual organisations or teams and with trust in certain stakeholders such as clients, suppliers or government agencies. Some of the literature dealing with these topics is reviewed later in this chapter. Because of the recurring use of various composite terms, the following abbreviations are used. The Five-Factor Model of personality structure is referred to as the FFM,28 and ability, benevolence and integrity as a unitary concept is abbreviated to ABI, following the convention of Dietz29 and Tan and Lim.30

71

Employee engagement in a South African context

THE CONCEPT OF TRUST In this section an explanation is given of what trust is, why it is important for organisations to investigate this concept and how it then influences employee engagement. Different models to investigate trust that have been suggested in the literature are also discussed. A multi-disciplinary or multi-paradigmatic approach is adopted, and more detailed attention is given to the way trust is defined, how these definitions are conceptualised in models of trust, and what bases or types of trust flow from the models of trust. Lastly, the process of trust formation is discussed, as this represents the way in which trust is operationalised from the trust models.

Defining trust There is no real consensus on what trust is; since different scientific disciplines concentrate on different aspects, no single definition is possible.31 After an extensive qualitative analysis of 121 definitions from the last 50 years according to key words or concepts, a quantitative cluster analysis revealed some interesting generalisabilities. Except for the fact that nearly all definitions have a general stem, they do cluster certain key words together. This confirms the general trend of the definitions used in the disciplines of organisational psychology or management studies mentioned above, for instance “confidence/confident”, “belief” and “exploit” cluster together, as do “willingness”, “risk” and “vulnerability”.32 Probably the best-known definition of trust is that of Rousseau et al.:33 “a psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based upon positive expectations of the intentions or behavior of another”. Mayer, Davis and Schoorman define trust as:34 “the willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the actions of another party based on the expectation that the other will perform a particular action important to the trustor, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other party”. Mayer et al. explain that “(m)aking oneself vulnerable is taking risk. Trust is not taking risk per se, but rather a willingness to take risk.”35 Martins,36 on the other hand, defines trust “as the process where a trustor relies on a trustee (a person or group of people) to act according to specific expectations that are important to the trustor without taking advantage of the vulnerability of the trustor”. In conclusion, it can be summarised as follows: Trust is considered a workplace-relevant belief or attitude towards another organisational member; it is in other words a psychological state – and is investigated from a micro-organisational and behavioural perspective.

72

Chapter 5: Trust and engagement

By deconstructing this complex phenomenon into the four aspects identified by Nooteboom,37 namely that: • • • •

a trustor trusts a trustee in one or more aspects of behaviour under certain circumstances,

the complexity of the phenomenon “trust” becomes apparent. Firstly there is the generic definition as the lay person understands the concept of trust. Because humans are complex and we cannot predict their behaviour, we want to simplify this process. Trust is a method of helping us to make a choice and take action by reducing the complexity of our environment when insufficient information is available to make a rational decision – for example, when co-operative actions are required in organisations, which involve trusting a supervisor or manager.38 In its most basic form, trust is a “very effective complexity reduction method” to simplify social complexities.39 In their exploration of cross-disciplinary commonalities, Rousseau et al.40 found that risk and interdependence are conditions that need to be present for trust to exist. They conclude that trust is not a behaviour or a rational choice (for instance to take a risk), but rather a psychological state resulting from or caused by these behaviours or choices. As there is a tendency to take “snapshots”41 when measuring trust, Rousseau et al.42 suggest that one should rather look at the natural stages in any relationship, ie the building, stability and dissolution phases of trust, although most researchers tend to concentrate on conceptualising their studies within a certain phase. Researchers use the Mayer et al.43 definition as a foundation as it is relevant to individuals’ trusting behaviours inside and outside an organisational context. As it also covers risk and interdependence as basic conditions necessary to establish trust, it is applicable across most disciplines that study trust.44 If there is no risk involved in a relationship, we do not need to trust the other party as we function from a basis of knowledge. Alternatively, if we are not dependent on the other party, we are not vulnerable and again do not need to trust.45 Dietz and Den Hartog46 summarise the most quoted definitions, and deduce that they can be broken down into trust as • • •

a belief a decision an action

73

Employee engagement in a South African context

In summary, Kramer and Lewicki47 conclude that all this boils down to the fact that in the broadest sense trust is a psychological state with many components and antecedents or consequences, and with one particular characteristic: it has “some sort of positive expectation regarding others’ behavior”.48 In the definition below, taken from the practical real-world context of organisational climate measurement, organisational trust is defined similarly. The concepts of open communication, risk and vulnerability (referred to as “sensitive or personal issues” in the definition below), expectations and integrity, all feature in this conceptualisation and lend greater credibility to the definitions as conceptualised by trust researchers: the perception of freedom to communicate openly with members at higher organisational levels about sensitive or personal issues with the expectation that the integrity of such communications will not be violated.49 Dietz and Den Hartog50 agree with Mayer et al.51 that ABI are the three main components of trust, but they add predictability (reliability), seeing that Cunningham and MacGregor52 and Mishra53 make out a strong argument for the inclusion of the latter. Since they occur most commonly in the intra-organisational literature, Dietz and Den Hartog54 define each of these attributes of the trustee as follows: • • • •

Benevolence reflects benign motives and a personal degree of kindness toward the other party, and a genuine concern for his or her welfare. Competence refers to the other party’s capabilities to carry out her or his obligations (in terms of skills and knowledge). Integrity involves adherence to a set of principles acceptable to the other party, encompassing honesty and fair treatment, and the avoidance of hypocrisy. Predictability relates specifically to consistency and regularity of behaviour (and as such is distinct from competence or integrity).

These components are said to be independent, ie if one is missing then we might not trust. However, according to Dietz and Den Hartog, they are also inter-dependent and “compartmentalised and aggregated such that parties, if they wish, may accommodate contradictions and errors, if they still judge the quality of the other’s trustworthiness, and/or the benefits of continuing to trust them, to be sufficient. In other words, one can trust or distrust different aspects of the other party”.55 Having tested the above empirically, Yakovleva et al.56 came to the conclusion that, as expected, ability is related to the cognitive dimension of trust and that perceived integrity and benevolence are associated with the affective dimension of trust. Martins’ definition was used as a basis for his research:57 “Trust can be defined as the process where a trustor relies on a trustee (a person or group of people) to act according to specific expectations that are important to the trustor without taking advantage of the vulnerability of the trustor.”

74

Chapter 5: Trust and engagement

According to Martins,58 trust is a dynamic phenomenon that depends on the interplay of various factors that might affect the building of a model of trust. Interestingly, more than a decade later Fulmer and Gelfand59 also use the term “expectations” when they define trust on an individual level concerning an individual trustee. They regard trust in this case as “a psychological state comprising willingness to accept vulnerability based on positive expectations of a specific other or others”.60 According to them, “positive expectations” refer to the three trustworthiness dimensions of ABI. They also adopt the vulnerability concept, rather than only the “positive expectations” concept. (See Fulmer & Gelfand (2012)61 for an extensive review and discussion on this point). The above definition by Martins62 covers all three the “forms” of trust that McEvily and Tortoriello63 include in their framework for measuring trust in organisations on a psychometric level. These are trustworthiness beliefs about another person (perceptual or attitudinal); trusting intentions whereby the trustor is willing to be made vulnerable; and trusting behaviours represented by risk-taking behaviour. From the above definitions it becomes clear that other authors64 also highlight the perceived vulnerability of the trustor and the underlying risk linked to such a dependant relationship. The other definitions focus mostly on the beliefs that an employee holds about the supervisor, manager or leader, and the consequent relationship between them. A product of this is the belief in the trustworthiness of a trustee as postulated by Mayer et al.65 where the ABI of the trustee are the main components that determine this trustworthiness. The next step – after defining the main concept, ie trust – is to investigate the two models of trust that are at the core of this chapter.

Models of trust As can be expected from the plethora of definitions and the near impossibility of finding one commonly agreed-upon definition, it is to be expected that the models of trust will also be quite diverse. Nonetheless, the applicable models are discussed in chronological order and not in any order of importance, although the first model by Mayer et al.66 seems to have gained the largest following in the community of trust researchers internationally. The model of Mayer et al.67 One of the most significant attempts to develop a model of trust is that of Mayer, Davies and Schoorman, who published their article introducing the Integrative Model of Organisational Trust in 1995. According to Bews,68 they were the first to address the importance of risk-taking in relationships and the characteristics of both the trustor

75

Employee engagement in a South African context

and trustee. Mayer and colleagues tried to break away from the socio-psychological approach to trust and focused the design of their model on trust in an organisational setting. Trust in an organisational setting used to be problematic, as previous research had been hindered by “a lack of clear differentiation among factors that contribute to trust, trust itself, and outcomes of trust”.69 Their model is an attempt to integrate the different research orientations such as personality theory research, experimental laboratory research and sociological research70 and is unequivocally the most influential model of trust beliefs with its three components of trustworthiness.71 Mayer and colleagues argue that it is important to investigate trust from this particular perspective and not from the perspective of trust of others in general, as the latter approach does not give information on the specific relationship between two individuals. It also does not explain why a trustor would trust a trustee. Lastly, they claim that if the trustor and trustee are not specified by researchers, it “encourages the tendency to change referents and even levels of analysis, which obfuscates the nature of the trust relationship”.72 This dyadic model differentiates between factors that contribute to trust (antecedents, trust itself, and outcomes of trust) that have to be measured to validate their model.73 It is important to take cognisance of the characteristics of the trustor and trustee in order to understand the willingness to trust between two persons. Personality characteristics or traits of the trustor that tend to let them trust others vary between individuals; some people trust easily while others do not. Mayer et al.74 refer to this trait as the propensity to trust. It is seen as a general willingness to trust others, which is not situation-specific, in other words this kind of trust is stable across situations.75 It seems to be a stable personality trait that affects the likelihood that the person will trust others.76 It is also referred to as trait trust, or that it “represents an individual’s dispositional tendency to trust or distrust other individuals”.77 Alternatively, it is also referred to as dispositional trust, and can be described as the initial amount of trust a trustor is willing to grant a trustee without any initial information.78 Some people tend to trust “most people” when they first meet them (a predisposition – cf Costa & Anderson, 2011; Kramer, 1999), while others, perhaps because of previous experience, do not really trust other people when they have just got to know them. This starting point or base level of trust that different people exhibit is influenced by developments in early life, cultural background79 and the status of the trustor.80 Trustors who are highstatus individuals tend to display a higher disposition to trust others of lower status. Table 5.1 contains a brief summary to conceptualise the main points of the Mayer et al. model.81

76

Chapter 5: Trust and engagement

Table 5.1. Main concepts of the model of Mayer et al.82, 83 TRUST IS • a willingness to be vulnerable to the actions of another party based on the expectation that the other will perform a particular action important to the trustor,84 • irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other party.85 Trustee

Trustor

Perceived trustworthiness

Propensity to trust

Consists of

a stable within-party factor ... propensity might be thought of as the general willingness to trust others ... People with different developmental experiences, personality types and cultural backgrounds vary in their propensity to trust.86

• • •

ability benevolence and integrity

… trust is a dyadic phenomenon and that propensity to trust and perceptions of ability, benevolence, and integrity of both partners affect the manifested level of trust.87

From table 5.1 it is clear that the perceived trustworthiness of the trustee, in other words the latter’s perceived ABI (on the one hand), and the trustor’s propensity to trust (on the other hand) will determine whether the trustor is willing to make him- or herself vulnerable to the trustee. With regard to the relationship of propensity to trust, trust and trustworthiness included in table 5.1, Yakovleva et al.88 confirm in their study that trustworthiness fully mediates the influence that propensity to trust has on trust. They see propensity to trust as a stable part of everybody’s personality structure and an important antecedent of trustworthiness. Once trustworthiness has been determined, propensity to trust will only have an indirect effect.89 Individuals with a high propensity to trust have been found to be more positive and less suspicious towards others in general, more sensitive to signs of trustworthiness, but not more gullible than others – just less sensitive to unfavourable information.90 Individuals with a low propensity to trust are more keenly aware of any signs that their trust might be broken or betrayed91 and are not willing to co-operate as much as individuals with a high propensity to trust.92 Using the above definitions as a starting point, some authors93 emphasise the fact that a perceived vulnerability needs to exist and as such an underlying risk is involved in what has become a dependent relationship. Other authors focus on an employee’s beliefs about other individuals in the organisation (co-worker, supervisor, manager or leader) and the resulting relationship. From this follows the belief in the trustworthiness of a trustee as postulated by Mayer et al.94 The ABI of the trustee are the main components that determine this trustworthiness.

77

Employee engagement in a South African context

•

Trustworthiness

Over time, different numbers of antecedents to trust were proposed, varying from one single factor or trustee characteristic to as many as ten. This continued until 1995 when Mayer et al. developed their integrative model and reduced these to the commonly known three-factor model of trustworthiness.95 Although these factors are not unrelated and often are highly correlated,96 they make a unique contribution to the perceived trustworthiness of the trustee.97 To clarify, trust is a “psychological construct or state”98 and should not be confused with the antecedents or behaviours that demonstrate trustworthiness and that are discussed here. These personality traits or characteristics of the trustee are also important in the context of understanding the concept of trustworthiness. Mayer et al.99 conclude that certain factors help build the foundations for the development of trust. Ability (competence), benevolence and integrity are the three traits or characteristics that explain a major portion of trustworthiness, and trustworthiness is a precondition of trust.100 Ability is “that group of skills, competencies, and characteristics that enable a party to have influence within some specific domain”.101 Engelbrecht and Cloete102 point out that a similar construct, namely competence, is used by authors such as Butler,103 Mishra104 and Clarke and Payne.105 Kramer and Lewicki106 also use the term “competence” and include the willingness of the trustee to acknowledge their own shortcomings and other performance issues. Benevolence is “the extent to which a trustee is believed to want to do good to the trustor”,107 or in the words of Engelbrecht and Cloete,108 “the extent to which the trustee is believed to act in good faith towards the trustor, aside from an egocentric profit motive”. According Mayer et al.,109 the implication of integrity for interpersonal trust “involves the trustor’s perception that the trustee adheres to principles that the trustor finds acceptable”. The following issues affect the degree to which a person is deemed to have integrity: • • • •

consistency of the party’s past actions credible communications about the trustee from other parties belief that the trustee has a strong sense of justice the extent to which the party’s actions are congruent with his or her words110

•

Trust and risk-taking

Mayer et al.111 argue that it is important to understand the role of risk as it is an essential component of any model of trust: “[t]here is no risk taken in the willingness to be 78

Chapter 5: Trust and engagement

vulnerable (ie, to trust), but risk is inherent in the behavioural manifestations of the willingness to be vulnerable”. According to them this means that trust is the willingness to assume risk, while trusting behaviour is the actual assuming of risk. Martins’ (2000) model of trust The question “which traits influence workplace trust” has largely remained unanswered.112 Research undertaken by Martins, Watkins, Von der Ohe and De Beer113 led to the development of an instrument that could be used to provide an indication of the level of trust a subordinate has in the person to whom he or she reports. This instrument was based on the assumption that trust in organisations is created by (perceived) personality factors (agreeableness, conscientiousness, resourcefulness, emotional stability and extraversion), representing the factors of the FFM and managerial practices (information sharing, work support, credibility and team management). It was later refined to the Trust Relationship Audit.114 According to this model, a trustor views a trustee as trustworthy if certain levels of these characteristics or antecedents of trust are present. Martins115 developed a comprehensive model that defines the specific personality attributes or characteristics of the trust relationship, also taking into account specific components of managers’ behaviour.116 •

Personality

The acceptance of the FFM of personality can mainly be attributed to the work of two groups of researchers who have centred around Costa and McCrae since 1985 (see for instance Costa and McCrae117 and the meta-analysis by Barrick and Mount).118 No other model of personality has been as widely accepted or researched as the Big Five framework.119 Not only did Martins120 and colleagues link personality to trust, but uniquely they did not fall back on the usual self-report of how the respondents see themselves, but looked at what subordinates perceive their supervisor or manager’s personality to be. These observer ratings of personality traits are even better predictors of overall job performance than self-report measures.121 This latter fact is of interest to scholars of trust, as trustworthiness is often linked to reputation and observer ratings are based on previous behaviour, ie reputation.122 In the Trust Relationship Audit a list of 39 bi-polar items are used to measure the Big Five personality traits. •

Managerial practices

A unique feature of the Martins123 model is the fact that it measures certain managerial practices as antecedents of trust. Although Whitener124 has already postulated that certain HR activities would increase trust in the supervisor or leader, Brower, Lester, Korsgaard and Dineen125 suggest that activities or practices that make the manager or supervisor more vulnerable – such as empowering employees and exchanging 79

Employee engagement in a South African context

information – will increase their trustworthiness. The only published research that is currently available on managerial practices – except for that by Martins and colleagues in the context of trust in leadership – also focuses on HR managerial practices and not on general managerial practices.126 The dimension of managerial practices originally consisted of the following four subdimensions: • • • •

credibility team management information-sharing work support

•

Trust relationship

This dimension reflects the relationship with the immediate supervisor in terms of openness, honesty, fairness and intention to motivate employees. It consists of items that measure the following statements: • • • • •

I have an open, trusting relationship with the person I report to. The person I report to openly and honestly reveals important work-related facts to me. The person I report to is fair in judging my performance. The person I report to demonstrates good intentions and motives towards me. I can believe what the person I report to says.

Some of these items might load on the antecedents of trust as postulated by Mayer et al.,127 as can be seen from cursory examination. For instance, the fourth item above refers to “good intentions” which in all probability will load on the benevolence component of trustworthiness. •

Additional dimensions

Confidential contract research undertaken in South Africa from 1998 to 2000 has indicated that the following additional dimensions need to be included in the questionnaire: • •

•

Information sources – this dimension measures the reliability and sufficiency of information sources. 360-degree trust – this dimension measures the impact of trust on all organisational levels, and felt trust. It is an indication of how much employees trust others and how well they think they are trusted. How change is experienced by different employees.

The next step would be to combine these two models, the theory-driven and tested Mayer et al.128 model and the survey-based pragmatic Martins129 model. The following 80

Chapter 5: Trust and engagement

is a unified organisational trust model that attempts to integrate the South African Martins130 model with the generally accepted Mayer et al.131 model. Specifically, it attempts to explain how the components of trustworthiness, namely ABI as postulated by Mayer et al.,132 can be extracted from the Trust Relationship Audit133 that measures the five main personality dimensions: four managerial practices and the trust relationship, according to Martins.134 Conceptual unified trust model In terms of Trafford and Leshem,135 the conceptual framework (or paradigm) used as a guideline to develop a unified model of trust can be represented as in figure 5.2. The unified model of trust integrates the Big Five trait theories of personality136 and managerial practices137 with ABI as antecedents of trust.138 Agreeableness Conscientiousness Emotional stability Resourcefulness

Big-five personality

Integrity

Extraversion Benevolence

Trust relationship

Credibility Team management Information sharing

Managerial practices

Ability

Work support Figure 5.2. Conceptual unified trust model integrating antecedents of organisational trust

The unified model of trust in figure 5.2 is used as the theoretical framework and functions as the heuristic.139 A refined unified conceptual model of organisational trust relationships, with specific reference to the structure of the antecedents of trust on the total construct of subordinates’ trust, was validated.140 The aim was to develop a model representing the antecedents of trust as manifested in the Martins141 model in the framework of the Mayer et al.142 model. The left-hand side represents the original point of departure,143 while the right-hand side represents the goal variables.144 The original model by Mayer et al.145 postulated three generic antecedents of trust: ability, benevolence and integrity. In the above model these factors still represent ABI, but they differentiate between antecedents that address beliefs about the personality on the one hand, and managerial practices attributed to the direct supervisor or manager

81

Employee engagement in a South African context

on the other. Dirks and Ferrin146 confirm that a relationship-based perspective and a character-based perspective can be accommodated in one model. According to this conceptualisation, “individuals observe leaders’ actions and draw inferences about the nature of the relationship with the leader (relationship-based perspective and/or the character of the leader (character-based perspective)”.147 They classified the antecedents of relationship-based trust into three categories. The first, namely “leader actions and practices,” is of interest in this case, as this label seems to capture the nature of the managerial practices’ latent variables quite well. Significantly, they report that these leader behaviours and “several management practices may be means of increasing trust in leadership”.148 Reiche et al.149 found that affective trust is just as important from a vertical downward perspective, as “managers consciously choose to engage in indirect reciprocity toward subordinates when subordinates’ behaviors trigger affective trust in managers. We may speculate that managers’ indirect reciprocations, in turn, also serve to develop subordinates’ trust in managers.” The conceptual model brings together two widely published and accepted theories of trust formation and enables the practitioner to narrow down the possible actions that build or maintain trust and hence enhance employee engagement.

Trust in leadership In a report on their seventh WorkUSA® survey conducted in 2002, Watson Wyatt Worldwide Research150 found that a majority of US employees not only had very little confidence in their senior managers, but that these levels of trust were falling. Only 39% of employees trusted their senior leaders. In Europe and the Middle East, the third most important issue after ineffective communication and excessive work pressure is a lack of trust in leadership.151 Only 40% of employees in these countries have trust in their senior leaders compared to 45% globally, while more than half of employees do not believe the information they receive from senior managers or leaders. In general, trust in organisations steadily declined in the United States of America from 2000 to 2005.152 In any organisation the role of leaders is pivotal, although the criteria against which the effects are to be measured are not always clear.153 On one hand, leaders are responsible for developing shared goals and coordinating tasks, which is facilitated by trust.154 On the other hand, leadership is responsible for creating an environment where trust can flourish between the various role-players.155 Mayer and Gavin156 determined empirically “that trust in management allows employees to focus on the tasks that need to be done to add value to their organisation” – hence employees should not have to worry about keeping their jobs. In the case of employees who care about helping others and who feel it is important that their work benefits others (prosocially motivated employees), the trustworthiness of their manager plays a mediating role when it comes to work 82

Chapter 5: Trust and engagement

performance.157 However, low integrity or benevolence in a manager could be mediated by these employees’ dispositional propensity to trust. A study by Grant and Sumanth158 shows for the first time that when it comes to work performance, the employee’s personal disposition to trust (trust propensity) can make up or compensate for a lack of trustworthiness of a manager. Zand159 sees building trust as one of the three main dimensions of leadership in the knowledge-processing organisation. The other two dimensions, processing knowledge and using power sensitively, interact with trust and one another. Accordingly, when leaders use relevant knowledge, people will trust them and give them the necessary power to lead. On the other hand, if people trust their leader, they will also disclose their knowledge and accept that the leader may use his or her power. Without timely and well-thought-out information or knowledge with which co-workers, subordinates and superiors will part only if trust exists, the leader cannot take the optimal decisions that are needed for optimal organisational functioning. From this, Zand160 postulates that trust, knowledge and power are interconnected and they reinforce one another. Burke, Sims, Lazzara and Salas161 refine the Mayer et al.162 model by introducing individual, team and organisational factors and a detailed breakdown of the outcomes of trust. In this context it is also important to note that Atkinson and Butcher163 point out that one needs to take cognisance of the reality of organisational life and not ignore the impact of politics on the formation of trust between managers and their subordinates. Kovač and Jesenko164 found that democratic leaders enjoy a higher level of trust among their subordinates, compared to authoritarian leaders or leaders who are perceived as feeble, indecisive and uncooperative. In another study that considers trust in leadership as a moderator that influences work performance, Crossley, Cooper and Wernsing165 found that higher work performance was the result of proactive managers setting more challenging goals. Supervisors who trusted their managers interpreted the challenging goals as motivating and not as selfish, exploitative behaviour on the part of the senior manager.166 This holds for a virtual leadership, where, as is very common today, supervisors and senior managers are not colocated.167 In Malaysia, Hassan and Ahmed168 found that authentic leadership contributed to employees’ trust in their leader. In conjunction, they found that interpersonal trust was also indicative of their work attitudes or behaviour (work engagement). On the topic of trust in leadership, it is important to make a distinction between trust in the leadership of an organisation and trust in the direct supervisor or trust in the organisation itself (institutional trust). This distinction was also important when considering how to repair trust, as the focus is not so much on the ABI of the individual leader or manager, but rather on the systems and reputation of the organisation.

83

Employee engagement in a South African context

The following question flows from the above: how do you differentiate between trust in your supervisor and trust in the organisation? Tan and Tan169 state that trust in your supervisor is a type of interpersonal trust (defined according to Mayer et al. as trust in a person over whose behaviour you have no control) and is different from trust in the organisation (defined according to Gambetta as the belief that the organisation will behave in a favourable or at least not in a detrimental way) which was linked to global indicators such as perceived organisational support and justice. This is important, as one might trust one’s direct supervisor or leader, and thus the organisation. Nevertheless, an employee can in certain circumstances still trust the leader, but not the organisation itself.170 It would be simplistic to see institutional and interpersonal trust as separate entities with no interaction or overlap, despite the fact that often they are treated as such for simplicity’s sake; they should be integrated, as it reflects reality much better.171 Interpersonal and institutional influences have an effect on or shape trust in leadership and hence, by implication, in the organisation. They see an overlap between interpersonal trustworthiness and trusting behaviours that comprises reliability, openness, competence and compassion (their version of ABI on one hand and institutional trust-building mechanisms on the other).172 In this case these consisted of ground-level interventions where an open-door policy, sharing of parking and dining facilities, and disposing of suits and ties were implemented.

The dark side of trust As with everything in life, even trust has a positive and a negative or a light and a dark side. Interestingly, in the literature this side of trust is very often ignored or mostly relegated to a side issue. Especially in the case of inter-organisational trust, the potentially detrimental or dysfunctional side of trust is hardly ever discussed.173 Gargiulo and Ertug174 are more concerned about the situation where there is too much trust or “excessive” trust. To explain this, they refer to the inverted U function, which implies that at a certain level of trust the dysfunctional side comes to the forefront. From that level of trust the disadvantages exceed the advantages. The problem is that of finding the optimal level of trust. Three behaviours have been singled out as especially dangerous if there is an excessive amount of trust in a relationship: •

•

84

Blind faith – it decreases monitoring of the trustee, who is free to act with malice as exposure is less likely; the trustor is gullible and the trustee probably has been given access to confidential information, which increases the potential damage. Complacency – it replaces commitment and leaves the trustee free to let performance slip.

Chapter 5: Trust and engagement

•

Unnecessary obligations – the parties are both burdened with additional responsibilities as they are committed to the trust relationship and feel indebted to one another.175

Other negative effects of trust mentioned in the literature on an interpersonal level include the following: • • •

intentional wrongful conduct and the fact that “trust may actually increase the potential for opportunistic behavior to occur”176 risk of betrayal and opportunistic behaviour by the trustee in alliances between buyers and suppliers177 a “lack of objectivity and considering of alternatives, inhibited creativity, overconfidence and ignoring of evidence speaking against one’s partners’ trustworthiness”178

On an intra-organisational level, an excess of trust can lead to not being totally objective when working in teams or starting new business units because of groupthink and not monitoring one other’s performance. On an inter-organisational level, it was found to be the reason why partners carry on supporting alliances that have outlived their usefulness.179 This so-called overtrust can lead to “leniency in judging the trustee, delay in perceiving exploitation, and increased risk-taking”.180 Just as in the case of the dark side of engagement,181 overtrust can lead to exploitation of employees.182 In the case of engagement, exploitation can occur when a purely managerial focus is used and the organisation benefits from the employees’ engagement (long hours, high output), while the employee does not benefit to the same degree, often sacrificing family life – even risking burnout.183 In the same way, without empowering leadership behaviour, high trust in the leader can have a negative effect as subordinates do not engage in challenging behaviour or make suggestions for improvement as high trust denies the “employees’ voice”.184 Linking to this situation where an excess of trust leads to unwanted outcomes, the question now has to be asked: what about the other extreme – very low trust or distrust? What is its connection to the concepts and models just explained?

Trust and distrust Posten and Mussweiler185 succinctly state that “[d]istrust is a natural reaction to deception” and as such is even evident in animals when they are searching for food or a mate. Distrust is of importance to organisations as there is a direct cost involved – such as the cost of developing and maintaining control mechanisms – if distrust prevails. Distrust indirectly causes employees not to share information with the organisation, as they realise that their unique knowledge is their biggest competitive advantage and the

85

Employee engagement in a South African context

reason the organisation is keeping them in its employ.186 Lewicki, McAllister and Bies187 propose a model grounded in assumptions of multi-dimensionality and posit that trust and distrust are two distinct constructs, rather than being opposite ends of the same continuum. Lewicki et al.188 define trust as “confident positive expectations regarding another’s conduct”, while they regard distrust as “confident negative expectations regarding another’s conduct”. Lewicki et al.189 refer to the above definitions and agree with Luhmann190 that in the case of trust “[w]e do not have to worry about the other parties’ undesirable behaviour, while in the case of distrust, life is made less complicated, as we expect undesirable behaviour and are ready to manage it”. They see both trust and distrust as distinct constructs, both ranging from high to low, ie high trust opposed to low trust and high or low distrust. In short, Lewicki et al.191 postulate the following in their model: • • • • •

High trust equals “hope, faith and confidence”. High distrust equals “fear, scepticism and vigilance”. Low distrust equals an “absence of fear”. Low trust equals “lack of hope, unsure assessment of others’ behavior, and hesitancy”. Trust and distrust are independent constructs that range from high to low on their own continuum.

This supports the viewpoint that interpersonal relations are more complex than linear one-dimensional bi-polar relations; in other words, low trust does not equal high distrust and neither does high trust equal low distrust. They are probably separate concepts192 that can be influenced differently by the mood of the trustor – a positive mood has different effects on trust and distrust, depending on the environmental cues.193 Lewicki et al.194 present the example of a spouse who trusts the partner to be the children’s caregiver, but not to drive the new and unfamiliar car. The point is that interpersonal relations to trust or distrust are built as we interact with others to gain a wider and deeper insight into them. One of the surprising advantages of distrust is that it leads to reduced stereotyping by individuals, as they tend to be more critical when judging others. A critical evaluation causes the judgement to be based on reality and not on preconceived ideas. In contrast, if we find somebody trustworthy, we are not as critical and might be subject to stereotyping others.195 Distrust must also not be confused with a normal decline in trust, although it can evolve from it. This is the case when an “opportunistic actor”196 is initially trusted, but over time it becomes apparent that this person does not really deserve this trust as evidence of a mismatch between trustworthiness and trust mounts. To reach equilibrium, trust will decline to match the new level of perceived trustworthiness. The distrust spiral downwards is also much faster than the gradual build-up of trust, as it is a slow

86

Chapter 5: Trust and engagement

process to gather evidence of trustworthy behaviour, but very easy to uncover proof of untrustworthy behaviour by the trustee.197 Lewicki et al.198 consequently state that one should be specific when asking questions about trust or distrust, and should rather ask “trust or distrust to do what?”. Cho199 for instance found that distrust and trust even have different antecedents and are shaped by different dimensions of trustworthiness – benevolence promotes trust, while ability (Cho200 uses the word “competence”) reduces distrust. Coming from another angle, Lapidot et al.201 found that the same trustor could rate a leader high on benevolence but low on ability. The trustor might also experience trust-enhancing and trust-eroding behaviour at the same time. Using narrative analysis, Keyton and Smith202 reach the conclusion that distrust is a psychological construct on its own. Similar results were achieved when functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) was used to make physical scans of the brain. Seemingly confirming the fact that trust and distrust are separate concepts, Dimoka203 specifically states that trust is associated with brain areas linked to anticipating rewards, predicting the behavior of others, and calculating uncertainty. Distrust is associated with brain areas linked to intense negative emotions and fear of loss. There results also show a clear distinction in the brain areas associated with the dimensions of trust and distrust with credibility and dis-credibility being mostly associated with the brain’s more cognitive areas, while benevolence and malevolence are mostly associated with the brain’s more emotional areas.

The above presents strong neurological evidence that trust and distrust are distinct constructs and not two extremes of the same scale. The implications of this finding may well have wider repercussions: a question that can now be asked is, for instance: are the consequences of trust such as job satisfaction or dissatisfaction distinct constructs or opposites?204 Taking this discussion one step further, in the next section the aspect of physiological evidence of trust is discussed.

Physiological evidence of trust Benbasat et al.205 argue that even in the social sciences, benefits can be derived from twenty-first century technology concerning physiological measurement. They also argue that this is a much neglected field that can contribute immensely to our understanding of the concept of trust. The field of neuroscience needs to be considered an important area of interdisciplinary research if the organisational sciences are to advance at the same rate as cognitive sciences.206 Neuroscience in this context concerns measurement of the functioning of the brain to shed light on the underlying functioning of certain

87

Employee engagement in a South African context

psychological and organisational phenomena.207 The idea is to investigate the most fundamental process that underlies work behaviour or observed work attitudes, or as Becker et al.208 suggest, the level of analysis needs to be reduced to “the most basic building blocks of behavior” so that organisational theories can be integrated in future. Interestingly, in the literature on physiological measurement of the brain there seems to be evidence that there is a specialised cognitive component that is responsible for judging the trustworthiness of others, and Fichman209 concludes that the evidence points to the limbic system and the amygdala. In another study, Dimoka210 tried to determine if trust and distrust are perceived as separate constructs. She found that fMRI scans of the brain showed that two different areas are used in the case of trust and distrust respectively. This confirms the theoretical assumptions that trust and distrust are separate entities. In another interesting development, Holtz211 uses evolutionary theory and neuroscientific research to explain trust formation. His explanation is based on the fact that we all take a split second to make judgements concerning people’s trustworthiness when we meet them for the first time. He also argues that this skill was needed to survive in the distant past. Humans use various signals to determine if they can trust somebody or not. These are often based on previous experience, stereotypes and various biological indicators such as age, weight, body language, attractiveness, disability and race.212 In his trust primacy model, Holtz213 makes use of the literature relating to rapid evaluation of facial characteristics to determine the trustworthiness of a target. When people are confronted with the task of judging the trustworthiness of an unknown person, Engell, Haxby and Todorov214 found that the more the perceived untrustworthiness, the more the amygdala of the brain reacted. This supports the theory that the amygdala helps individuals to judge trustworthiness in support of “approach/ avoidance behaviour”.215 In a follow-up study, Todorov, Pakrashi and Oosterhof216 found that it took only between 33 and 100 milliseconds to make a reliable decision concerning the trustworthiness of faces that subjects were exposed to. This is just above the subliminal level, meaning trustworthiness (and perhaps other personality attributes) can be sensed nearly instantaneously, but not on a subconscious level. In contrast, Huang and Murnighan217 examined the nonconscious automatic activation of trust in an experimental setup and found that subliminal cues can influence trusting behaviour. It appears that this occurs without conscious awareness (however, not subconsciously). In this case, the experimentation involved “economic return games” and the use of subliminally flashed names of their least and most liked person.218 Huang and Murnighan219 conclude that “positive relational cues might provide the impetus for a wide array of interpersonal outcomes, ranging from unexpectedly accelerated interactions to mutually rewarding, self-fulfilling trusting prophecies”. The implication of this finding is that managers of groups with a rapidly changing group composition 88

Chapter 5: Trust and engagement

can make use of social photos and artwork to build trust quickly, based on subliminal references to previous occasions where successful trust relationships were the basis of higher team performance.220 Holtz221 and Todorov et al.222 found that trustees show more brain activity linked to fear if exposed to stimuli of untrustworthy faces than to neutral or trustworthy faces. Said, Baron and Todorov223 therefore refined the experiment and found that both “highly untrustworthy” and “highly trustworthy” faces activate the amygdala in a subject’s brain. Said et al.224 subsequently reported that the amygdala is more sensitive to untrustworthy than trustworthy faces. This supports the previous evolutionary-linked findings that suggest that humans evolved this ability to instantly judge trustworthiness as part of a survival strategy. In a related field, Riedl, Hubert and Kenning225 conducted an fMRI study on the perceived trustworthiness of e-Bay offers, and found that “brain areas that encode trustworthiness differ between men and women”. They also found that women activate more brain areas than men. Benbasat et al.226 surmise from the areas activated that this might be evidence that women act upon their emotions more readily than men. In the preceding section it has been shown that trust research is at the forefront of being part of the suggested new organisational neuroscience paradigm. This has three advantages for trust research: firstly, a more fundamental but deeper understanding of organisational behaviour; secondly, a focus on the nonconscious aspects of behaviour (note that this is not the subconscious as commonly referred to in psychology), and lastly, possible answers to unsolved theoretical questions,227 as was the case with the trust–distrust continuum that was discussed above.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ORGANISATIONAL PRAXIS Many managers ask themselves the rhetorical question: “What happens when you trust your supervisor?” In an attempt to answer precisely this question, Li and Tan228 investigated it from a psychological perspective based on Kahn’s theory. On a very theoretical level they found that trust in your supervisor has a positive influence on performance, which can be attributed to psychological availability and psychological safety,229 which is then the link to enhanced work engagement. But findings like these do not assist the practitioner to find value in the results of research or to get support from top management to invest in trust-building or trust maintenance programmes. To counter this, the repairing of trust relationships will be discussed in the next section.

Repairing trust relationships At some stage or other, most relationships go through periods where trust is violated, broken or damaged and thus needs to be repaired. As a background to understanding 89

Employee engagement in a South African context

trust repair interventions, Kramer and Lewicki230 list the most common reasons for a breakdown in trust as identified by Fraser in an unpublished doctoral dissertation from 2010. Fraser used interviews and focus groups in workgroups and found that the eight most frequently cited factors that contributed to a breakdown in trust are disrespectful behaviour; communication problems; unmet expectations such as breaking promises or the psychological contract; bad leadership; not taking ownership of mistakes; performance issues; incongruence between behaviour and organisational values or practices; and, lastly, structural issues such as “changes in systems and procedures, lack of structure or too much structure, and misalignment of job duties and authority”.231 As they point out, most of the above can be allocated to the classification of types of trustworthiness, ie ABI by Mayer et al.,232 while factors such as communication and structure are probably more of an organisational nature. Tomlinson and Mayer233 define trust repair as “a partial or complete restoration of the willingness to be vulnerable to the other party following a decline in that willingness. In the context of the Mayer et al. model, then, trust repair is a specific case of the development of trust via changes in the process represented in the feedback loop”. Kramer and Lewicki234 also base their definition of trust repair on the definitions of Mayer et al.235 They refer to the concept of vulnerability and then go on to describe trust repair as the act of convincing a trustor to be willing to be vulnerable in the future after the trustee has taken advantage of the said vulnerability. They then link this to Dirks, Lewicki and Zaheer,236 who state: “relationship repair occurs when a transgression causes the positive state(s) that constitute(s) the relationship to disappear and/or negative states to arise, as perceived by one or both parties, and activities by one or both parties substantively return the relationship to a positive state.” Note that Dirks et al.237 refer to relationship repair, of which trust repair is only one aspect. From the above, it becomes apparent that just as researchers cannot agree on the definition of trust, they also cannot agree on what trust repair means. Some adopt a cognitive and others an emotive or behavioural approach to trust repair.238 Very few focus on emotions or behavioural change.239 The question of whether trust will be repaired or not was conceptualised by Kim, Dirks and Cooper,240 who postulated that this would depend on both the trustors’ efforts to resist the repair (as their trust has been violated) and the trustees’ attempts to repair the trust relationship (as they lose the benefits associated with being trustworthy). The value of the model by Kim et al.241 lies in the fact that it becomes quite clear that a concerted effort by all the parties concerned is needed to rebuild trust. If the trustee is not serious about reinstating the trust relationship, a trust violation can lead to avoidance and confirmation of the feeling of mistrust. In a worst-case scenario, if both parties feel strongly about it, the breach can lead to a forceful confrontation between them. For example, even in the case of calculative trust that has been violated in an 90

Chapter 5: Trust and engagement

economic exchange, Desmet, De Cremer and Van Dijk242 experimentally established that monetary compensation does not help rebuild the trust if the breach was intentional. Neither overcompensation nor apologies could restore trust if the trustor suspected bad intent on the part of the trustee. What needs to be repaired depends on what aspect of the relationship was breached – research has shown that there are three inter-related factors that need to be addressed to repair a relationship, namely damaged trust, negative affect and negative exchanges.243 In an inter- and intra-organisational context Dirks et al.244 developed a conceptual framework for this purpose. The three theoretical processes that Dirks et al.245 propose for trust repair following a transgression are: first, a psychological attribution process must be initiated to deal with the intra-personal aspects of relationship repair; second, the social equilibrium needs to be restored to deal with the inter-personal aspects; and lastly, the structural process suggests that the implementation of preventative measures should create positive expectations about the future conduct of others (see table 5.2). Table 5.2. Process of relationship repair Attributional

Social equilibrium

Structural

Transgression leads to disequilibrium in relationship and social context; repair involves social processes by means of which equilibrium in the relationship is restored.

Transgression leads to a breakdown in positive exchange and increase in negative exchange; repair involves structural processes by which negative exchange is discouraged and positive exchange is encouraged.

Individuals desire to have equilibrium in norms and social relationships.

Individuals are motivated by self-interest in relationships; targets engage in transgressions when the incentives of a situation make it profitable to do so and perceivers will help maintain a relationship so long as it is profitable.

Perspective Transgression leads to loss of trust through an attribution process; repair involves cognitive processes by means of which trust is restored.

Assumption Individual differences of actors (trustworthiness) are the primary determinant of behaviour; therefore perceivers are motivated to draw attributions and targets are motivated to shape those attributions.

91

Employee engagement in a South African context

Attributional

Social equilibrium

Structural

Implications for repair strategies and tactics Targets will try to shape perceivers’ attributions about whether they committed a transgression, whether it reflects on their true nature, or whether they experienced redemption. Examples of tactics: social accounts, apologies, denial, penance

Targets will engage in appropriate social rituals to restore equilibrium in standing and norms. Examples of tactics: penance, punishment, apologies

Targets will implement structures or use other signals to provide credible assurance of positive exchange and prevent future transgressions. Examples of tactics: legalistic remedies (incentives, monitoring, social structures)

(Adapted from Dirks et al.)246

Moving from the generic relationship repair interventions to the more specific trust repair interventions, Kramer and Lewicki247 discuss explanations and apologies as the main ways to make amends for trust violations on the one hand. On the other hand, reparation or compensation are alternative or additional ways to recompense or make up for a violation and restore the relationship of trust. The effectiveness of simple explanations and apologies has not been researched extensively, but as would be expected it depends on how satisfactory or adequate the explanation is whether the trustor will accept it. However, as Kramer and Lewicki248 point out, “adding substantive reparations increased the effectiveness of the verbal accounts”. Although there is anecdotal evidence that apologies are effective if they are not just considered “cheap talk”,249 it is better to apologise than to ignore the trust violation. The apology needs to be sincere and take place sooner rather than later.250 The trust violator also has to accept responsibility for the violation and refrain from blaming somebody or something else. Concerning the context within which trust repair has to take place, it was proposed that in the case of high-stakes relationships trustees are quicker to trust and will be willing to accept the violation more readily as they have both a confirmatory bias and attribute more benevolence to the violating trustor than would normally be the case. In other words, they will be less likely to blame the trustee for the transgression as they have too much to lose if they withdraw their trust or have to admit that they trusted the wrong person.251 In this case the trustor also gets the “benefit of the doubt”. Another outcome is that the trustee will avoid cognitive dissonance and the emotional stress linked to this by denying the trust violation. If on the other hand the trustor’s dependence is low and the relationship is important, the trustee will have to put more energy into the repair

92

Chapter 5: Trust and engagement

effort. He or she will not be able to rely on the trustor’s vested interest in maintaining the relationship.252 Taking it up one level, from the dyadic to the organisational, it has to be remembered that trust repair often needs to be approached from the organisational level. Here legalistic and structural interventions can ensure that trust violations do not occur as easily in the future by functioning as a deterrent or even punishment.253 As Kim et al.254 point out, this method may in fact hinder trust as it does not address the problem of the trustee not being trustworthy. It merely reduces the risk of rendering oneself vulnerable, while Dirks, Kim, Ferrin and Cooper255 see this situational approach as “perceived prevention”. They argue for the use of a dispositional approach in certain situations and suggest that “perceived repentance” would be more effective in repairing trust.256 Perceived repentance focuses on regret, reform and resolve. In other words: does the violator regret his or her actions? Is the violator willing to reform? Does he or she show resolve not to transgress in the future? Dirks et al.257 found that both perceived prevention and perceived repentance are effective, depending on the type of violation. In the case of a competence-based trust violation, repentance proved to be more effective in repairing trust than when the violation was based on a lapse of integrity. On an organisational level, it is not always a simple case of an individual’s trust being broken, but in the organisational reality it is often an individual who violates the trust of a group of employees. In this regard, Kim et al.258 found that repair is much more complex than if it was an individual, seeing that groups are harsher judges than individuals. It was especially difficult if the violator did not offer an effective response – such as apologising in the case of a competence-based violation or denying guilt in the case of an integritybased trust violation.259 Except for apologies and denials offered after the occurrence of trust violations, Ferrin, Kim, Cooper and Dirks260 found that reticence as a verbal response to trust violations is as inefficient as apologies, since the acceptance of guilt is absent. By reticence they mean the tendency of organisational representatives or managers not to offer any explanation or statements concerning an act of trust violation. These managers remain silent or else refuse to deny or admit anything.261 Maintaining and enhancing trust Consider the failure of Enron, WorldCom and others because of corrupt management and the very public disclosure of financial self-enrichment by corrupt managers (such as Bernie Madoff) during the financial crisis of 2008.262 Other spectacular failures include Lehman Brothers in the United States of America and the Royal Bank of Scotland that had to be taken over by the government. Furthermore, ethical failures at Siemens, the then DaimlerChrysler, Deutsche Post AG and Volkswagen/Porsche companies broke

93

Employee engagement in a South African context

down the foundations of trust.263 The question that remains is: how do you rebuild trust once it has been betrayed? Six, Nooteboom and Hoogendoorn264 emphasise that one of the most important aspects to attend to when trying to build or maintain trust is to send regular unambiguous positive signals that one is to be trusted. It is necessary to perform these actions due to the following: • • • •

“Inadvertent slip-ups on the part of the trustee” leading to misunderstandings. The trustee did not realise that his or her actions could be seen as negative. “Misperceptions on the part of the trustor” (for instance because of ambiguity, a noisy environment or wrongful attribution to the trustee and not the system). “The asymmetry between positive and negative relational signals”, for instance when the verbal and non-verbal behaviour does not seem to correspond or when in the case of a matching quantity of positive and negative behaviour, the negative outweighs the positive as trustors tend to be loss averse.265

Even though a great deal has been written about the antecedents and consequences of trust, there is little theoretical research to confirm what actions or underlying processes have been found in practice to build, enhance or maintain trust.266 Although they used a rather unique psychoanalytic paradigm of relational signalling, the five theoretical factors of trust-building actions that could be confirmed empirically and are listed below are of general value in the organisational context as they also show that one needs to move from task-oriented activities to relationship-oriented activities when maintaining or building trust: • • • • •

Enact solidarity. Accept influence. Prevent misattributions. Prevent disappointments. Bolster self-confidence.

From a practical point of view, it is interesting to note that many of the items representing the five factors include activities that trustees in a high-trust relationship carry out intuitively and that are familiar in the trust literature. Six et al.267 also remark that their work confirms the importance of raising awareness among staff to frequently carry out the above trust-building behaviour. Linking this to a more familiar paradigm, empirical research has found that if leaders want to build trust, they need to concentrate on benevolent behaviours and avoid missteps in behaviour that represent integrity and ability, as these carry more weight when it comes to trust erosion.268

94

Chapter 5: Trust and engagement

Organisation-level trust repair As editors of a special edition of the International Journal of Human Resources Management on “Trust and HRM in the new millennium”, Zeffane and Connel269 came to the worrying conclusion that employees in general lack trust in managers and employers. They identified “flexible capitalism”270 with its short-term focus and its dearth of loyalty or mutual commitment as one of the reasons for this dilemma. More specifically they found the following: “In other words, the prevalence of restructuring and contingent labour creates an environment of superficiality, in which workers and businesses are indifferent towards one another and in which trust, respect and mutual goals have no time to develop”.271 Considering the positive consequences of high trust and the levels of low trust in general,272 in the next section means and ways of developing or increasing trust in an organisation are discussed. Enhancing trust in organisations – the role of presumptive trust “Simply repairing trust, however, is obviously of little enduring importance if that trust cannot be made more secure and resilient. We need to do more than simply provide a ‘quick fix’ with respect to low trust. We also need to create the conditions that are conducive to the enhancement and maintenance of trust”.273 Kramer and Lewicki274 argue that the normal features or aspects determining trustworthiness that apply to dyadic trust relationships cannot apply to the organisational environment, as it is a less personal and more circuitous and indirect type of trust. Our trust is not targeted at a specific individual; it is a more non-personal and indirect type of trust. However, every individual in the organisation contributes to or detracts from the level of this “collective resource” or “social capital” that an organisation or a group or level in the organisation possesses.275 These authors call this construct presumptive trust, because trust “in other organisational members constitutes a generalized social expectation perceivers confer on the collective as a whole”.276 Presumptive trust is in other words a diffuse expectation and a shared positive stereotype of members of the “in-group” in an organisation. The “in-group” comprises the ones to whom we presume the stereotype applies, and thus we find it easier to consider them trustworthy. The above links up closely with identification-based trust,277 which basically predicts that we generally have more positive stereotypes of in-group than of out-group members. However, we also expect these in-group members to “adhere to a principle or norm of generalized reciprocity” that would increase presumptive trust, as it gives some level of “knowledge” of expected behaviour by the trustee.278

95

Employee engagement in a South African context

Two more organisational bases of presumptive trust are role-based and rule-based trust. In the case of role-based trust, the trustor tends to trust people who occupy certain roles (cf the common saying: “Trust me – I am a doctor”). We are less concerned with the knowledge we have about an individual’s specific abilities, but deduce his or her probable trustworthiness from the role that he or she occupies.279 Hence it serves as a substitute for personal knowledge on which we could base positive expectations.280 The traditional view that invariably there is conflict or tension between different levels in an organisation is not necessarily accurate when a shared purpose exists to reach common organisational goals. In fact, this view supports the enhancement of presumptive trust. Rule-based trust, on the other hand, posits that having knowledge of which rules the trustee (and trustor in some cases) have to follow “contribute to presumptive trust not only through their influence on individuals’ expectations regarding other members’ behaviors, but also by shaping their expectations regarding their own behavior”.281 This is for instance the case where liberal systems of flexible working hours were introduced in organisations, and trusted employees subsequently worked significantly more hours (unpaid) than they did before management showed trust and removed the strict control measures.282 The above are ways to solve the information paradox that seems to exist by providing information that we cannot gather objectively as trustors to determine trustworthiness.283 One should however not forget the contribution that leaders can make towards presumptive trust, by the nature of their capacity to let employees believe in their own ability to reach goals, ie attribute success to themselves as leaders. By attending to the above antecedents of presumptive trust, we can maintain or enhance inter- and intraorganisational trust. Gillespie and Dietz284 investigated trust repair on an organisational level, after an organisation has broken trust through an organisation-level failure such as incompetence, major avoidable accidents, accounting frauds or exploitation. It is important to note that employees lose trust in their employer despite the fact that the stakeholders (customers, shareholders, the community, etc) and not necessarily the employees themselves are harmed by the organisational representatives’ actions or failure to act. Gillespie and Dietz285 suggest that the appropriate trust repair intervention should be based on the component of the trust relationship that is threatened, as the different components of the organisation will give an indication of the trustworthiness of the whole organisational system, depending on the exact component in which the breach of trust had its origin. The six organisational system components that are relevant are “leadership and management practice; culture and climate; strategy; structures, policies and processes; external governance; and public reputation”.286 In each one of these components certain regulations are suggested that will inhibit or confine unwanted behaviour. They also

96

Chapter 5: Trust and engagement

suggest certain behaviours that will show that renewed trustworthiness is warranted and hence renew trustworthiness in the organisation. However, the interventions prescribed by Gillespie and Dietz287 cannot be implemented in isolation. They have to support and build on one another by providing a consistent message to the employees. There needs to be congruence between the various interventions that try to demonstrate ability, integrity and benevolence.288 The last two categories, external governance and public reputation, link back to Zucker’s institutional-based trust that also includes the increasingly important consumer and environmental interest groups that have a direct influence on the organisation’s reputation. Bachmann289 reiterates the importance of institutional trust and points out that an institutional focus is probably the only way to repair the damage that was done to the perceived trustworthiness (reputation) of the financial sector during the 2008 financial crisis (which was still enduring in 2016). To concentrate only on the ABI of the employees of the organisation, in other words to follow the ABI interpersonal approach, will not suffice. Members of the public probably still trust the individual employees with whom they interacted in these organisations, but they do not trust the financial institutions as such.290 Enhance or increase trust levels by means of information-sharing According to Ghani and Hussin,291 a leader can gain trust by sharing information (good or bad) – either in the form of data or technical information. Employees then tend to infer that they have the leader’s attention and deduce from this that they are trusted by their leader. On the other hand, Ghani and Hussin292 postulate that if a leader does not share information, the employees assume that they are not trusted and that their leaders think they might misuse the information out of ignorance. The answer to this problem would be training in the interpretation and use of information. Gill293 mentions that the level of trust in management depends on the employees’ view of management’s history and their experiences with the different levels of management. Employees also regard the lack of a functional information flow as critical, and it “emerged that some employees did not trust line managers to communicate information downwards from senior management or to communicate their ideas back up to senior management”.294 A lack of feedback in a participative approach is also detrimental to trust, as the general complaint by employees that their inputs are not used or that there is no feedback after a consultation process can often be linked to management’s failure to ensure that employees are aware of management having in fact used the employees’ inputs.295 The same applies to situations where trust between business partners as entrepreneurs has to be developed, and it was found that personal rapport and particularly the sharing of business information developed trust, which in turn led to business collaboration.296

97

Employee engagement in a South African context

Ghani and Hussin297 concur with Whitener, Brodt, Korsgaard and Werner298 that to increase trustworthiness, managers need to display certain behaviour to be trusted by their subordinates (especially explaining in detail the reasons for taking certain decisions or actions). Whitener et al.299 define “managerial trustworthy behaviour” as behaviour that is consistent, demonstrates integrity and shows concern. Furthermore, the sharing and delegation of control and openness of communication are important antecedents of trust of managers by employees. Building on this, Cho and Ringquist300 define the term “trustworthiness of managerial leadership” (TWML), which is the common dimension underlying ABI in managers. In respect of communication, Whitener et al.301 conducted an extensive literature review and identified accurate information, explanations for decisions, and openness as behaviour by trustees (managers) to be important for increased trustworthiness. More specifically, they suggest that accuracy of information flow, accurate and forthcoming communication, a thorough explanation of decisions, timely feedback on decisions, and open communication (in which managers exchange thoughts and ideas freely with employees) lead to higher levels of trust. According to Whitener et al.,302 the emphasis in communication is on the sharing and exchange of ideas. In a partial confirmation of the above categorisation of “managerial trustworthy behaviour”, Korsgaard, Brodt and Whitener303 found that in conflict situations managers are blamed less if communication is open and concern is demonstrated. Norman, Avolio and Luthans304 empirically established that it is advantageous for a leader to be both positive and open/transparent as it helps to gain followers’ trust and increases their (the leaders’) perceived effectiveness. As both constructs, ie a positive psychological capacity and transparent/open conduct, can be developed easier than traits, Norman et al.305 see this as a practical and straightforward method to increase followers’ trust in their leaders (and also the leaders’ perceived effectiveness). Ghani and Hussin306 expand on the above by listing the following (seemingly commonsense?) behaviours that they felt managers should exhibit to increase trustworthiness: • • • • • •

98

explaining decisions or actions being transparent and sincere when taking decisions ensuring actions are in line with organisational objectives and vision keeping their promises creating a supportive climate abstaining from threats or forceful behaviour

Chapter 5: Trust and engagement

CONCLUSION Combining the Martins307 model of organisational trust developed in South Africa with the Integrative Model of Organisational Trust by Mayer et al.308 results in the conceptual unified trust model. The latter can assist managers to identify and address the antecedents of trust in organisations and thereby directly and indirectly enhance the work engagement of employees. The reader cannot go wrong by remembering the concluding comments of Lin,309 that there is no ‘‘one size fits all’’ solution to enhance work engagement or organizational trust by a single dimension, ... Management must understand that work engagement formation is a complex process ... It is important to keep in mind that work engagement is not just purely driven by employees’ personal needs, but also by the social needs accomplished by the organization.

99

Chapter 6 Engagement in diverse workspaces: An African and international application by Rica Viljoen

INTRODUCTION In this chapter the author attempts to build on the theory presented in chapter 3 on engagement in diverse workspaces as a result of multi-cultural dynamics. In the previous chapter, the development of the Benchmark of Engagement Questionnaire (BeQ) and the importance of considering multi-cultural settings were discussed. In this chapter, the emphasis shifts to different theories and approaches that deal with various aspects of national culture. Spiral dynamics or human niche theory, which describes various worldviews or archetypes in thinking systems, is introduced. An understanding of how these thinking systems are represented in an organisation can assist OCD consultants and business leaders alike to translate strategy and meaning throughout the organisation while ensuring that interventions are culturally congruent. The BeQ uniquely incorporates human niches into an integral understanding of engagement in different contexts. The chapter is presented in two parts. In the first part, various multi-cultural theories are discussed. The multi-cultural properties of the BeQ are discussed and the different parts of the BeQ that focus on individual, group, organisational and over-cultural dynamics are introduced. Although some readers may feel the argument is ambitious, it is with this complexity and with consistent attention to inclusivity that the topic of engagement in multi-cultural settings can be presented in an authentic, integral manner. The BeQ philosophy was used in all the country-specific examples that are discussed in this chapter. The second part of the chapter deals with the application of the BeQ methodology and approach in Tanzania and Ghana, as West and East African countries. Finally, insights gained about the over-culture of China and Australia are shared.

MULTI-CULTURAL APPROACHES FOR CONSIDERATION Introduction The following multi-cultural attempts may be incorporated in conducting research in foreign countries: Geert Hofstede,1 the Globe studies,2 Fons Trompenaars,3 and human niches/spiral dynamics, as described by Clare Graves,4 Don Beck,5 Loraine Laubscher6 and the author.7 Each of the approaches is briefly discussed below. The BeQ is aligned to these 101

Employee engagement in a South African context

theories. Each of the approaches is briefly discussed below. The BeQ is aligned to these theories. Theoretical building blocks described in these approaches were incorporated in the grounded theory research conducted by Viljoen8 and can be described by the BeQ. The integration of national cultural dynamics in engagement studies is to ensure that the different worldviews and thinking structures of employees are considered from an ethnographic point of view during all the phases of the research design.

Hofstede The worldview of the country in which the organisation operates can provide valuable context for the dynamics reported by the BeQ enquiry. Hofstede9 advised management who operate across country boundaries to have both knowledge of and empathy with the local scene. According to Hofstede, national cultures differ on the following scales as described in table 6.1:10 Table 6.1: Hofstede dimensions (adapted from Brewer and Venaik)11 Hofstede dimension

Description

Power distance

The degree to which people in a country view inequality among people of the country as normal

Individualism

The degree the society reinforces individual or collective achievement and interpersonal relationships

Masculinity

The extent to which a culture is conducive to dominance, assertiveness and acquisition of things versus a culture conducive to people, feeling and quality of life

Uncertainty avoidance

The degree to which people in a country prefer structured over unstructured solutions

Long-term orientation

The degree to which there is a future orientation, like savings, versus short-term, implying a past and present perspective, like fulfilling social obligations and showing respect for tradition

By understanding the cultural context of the country in which an organisation operates, a greater understanding is gained of the dynamics that play out among the people. Including this theory in understanding the dynamics in a specific environment is an attempt to contextualise the unique people dynamics taking place within the business operation, so as to enhance customisation of what needs to be addressed and how this must be done in terms of intervention processes. Benchmark data of the Hofstede studies are readily available on the internet. It is advisable that the organisational researcher keeps in mind the particular sample group of the original data of the Hofstede benchmark data and considers whether this data is applicable to the total population that is being studied. 102

Chapter 6: Engagement in diverse workspaces: An African and international application

The Globe studies The GLOBE (Global Leadership and Organisational Behavior Effectiveness) research expanded on the work of Hofstede.12 The following seven dimensions as described in table 6.2 are considered: Table 6.2: Globe study dimensions (adapted from House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorman and Gupta)13 Globe Dimension

Description

Performance orientation

The degree to which a society encourages high standards of performance, and rewards innovation and improvement

Assertiveness

The degree to which individuals are assertive, tough, dominant and aggressive in social relationships

Future orientation

The extent to which members of a society or an organisation believe that their actions will influence their own future and reward individuals for being fair, tolerant, altruistic, kind and caring to others

Humane orientation

The degree to which a collective encourages and rewards individuals for being fair, tolerant, altruistic, kind and caring to others

Institutional collectivism

The extent to which a society’s organisational and institutional norms and practices encourage and reward collective action and collective distribution of resources

In-group or individual collectivism

The degree to which individuals express pride, loyalty or cohesiveness in their organisations and families

Gender egalitarianism

The degree to which the collective minimises gender inequality

Considering these aspects in interpreting engagement study results in organisations can greatly assist in understanding different worldviews and how to do business in various countries. The BeQ approach considers these aspects of national culture. As explained in the previous chapter, multi-group equivalence was tested in the development phases of the BeQ. Typically a comparison is done between the official Hofstede data and the themes that emerge in the social system through mixed-methods data-gathering efforts to determine the national cultural dynamics at play in a social system.

Trompenaars Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner14 identified the seven dimensions presented in table 6.3 under which different cultures could be compared:

103

Employee engagement in a South African context

Table 6.3: Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner dimensions (adapted from Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner)15 Trompenaars/Hampden-Turner dimensions

Description

Universalism

Particularism

The importance of rules versus relationships

Individualism

Communitarianism

Function as individual or group

Specific

Diffuse

How separate do they keep their private and working life?

Neutral

Affective

Are they neutral or do they display emotion?

Achievement

Ascription

Must they prove themselves to receive status or is it given to them?

Past – sequential

Future – synchronic

Are things done one at a time or are several things done at once?

Internal

External

Do they control their environment or are they controlled by it?

The purpose of this chapter is not to provide a comprehensive literature review of the different aspects of national culture. Rather, it is to make the reader acutely aware that the national culture or the over-culture should be studied in terms of organisations and its employees. Studying these dynamics can provide valuable information about organisational dynamics. According to the BeQ philosophy, individual engagement dynamics should not be interpreted without also understanding the over-cultural dynamics. As explained in the previous chapter, and as the examples at the end of this chapter illustrate, engagement manifests differently in different contexts. The author warns OCD consultants to take cognisance of multi-cultural dynamics when interpreting engagement study results.

Human niches/spiral dynamics Introduction Spiral dynamics16 or human niches, as described by Viljoen and Laubscher,17 are incorporated in the theoretical underpinning of the multi-cultural instrument that is discussed here, namely the BeQ. Human niche dynamics that describe various worldviews form an integral part of this approach. Beck18 made it his life’s work to keep the work of Graves true to its intent. Laubscher19 has made a promise to Beck to do the same for him in keeping his teachings pure. It is from this lineage that the author also writes. In more than 30 years of analysis of meta-data, Graves identified eight codes of adult development. Beck’s20 own data added another 40 years to this depth. Laubscher21 contributed 60 years’ data that she gathered 104

Chapter 6: Engagement in diverse workspaces: An African and international application

from emerging economies. The eight basic themes were described as ever-oscillating and evolving codes of adult human development. This is not a chapter on spiral dynamics; the application of the different thinking systems in this chapter is in the context of their impact on organisations and engagement, and how various thinking systems engage. The different human niches Eight different thinking systems can be identified, as shown in table 6.4. Table 6.4 Human niches and thinking archetypes (adapted from Beck)22 Beige

1. A-N “BAND” • herd-like behaviour • strong members surround and protect the weaker ones • group bands together for mating, food gathering, etc • movements determined by weather, availability of food and water

Individual

Purple

2. B-O “TRIBE” • circular clan, kin, tribal, family structure • roles determined by kinship, sex, age, ancestry • the ways and the culture are rigidly preserved • chief makes decisions, advised by elders/ shamans • custom demands obedience to a leader/ elder

Collective

Red

3. C-P “EMPIRE” • power-oriented – strongest survive best • most powerful person makes the decisions • Big Boss directs Work Bosses who drive the masses • communication downward only: strength determines relationships

Individual

Blue

4. D-Q “PASSIVE HIERARCHY” • rigid rules for structure and rank • person with appropriate position and power makes decisions • divine authority speaks through secular authority • communication downward and horizontally across classes • people stay in their “rightful” places

Collective

105

Employee engagement in a South African context

Orange

5. E-R “ACTIVE HIERARCHY” • bureaucratic and status-oriented • person with the delegated authority makes decisions • distribution of specific amount of responsibility • communication down, up, and across • power related to prestige and position within the structure – allows for upward mobility

Individual

Green

F-S “SOCIAL NETWORK”

Collective

• • • • • Yellow

organisation of equals for mutual benefit little concern with status or privilege the “people” make decisions as a group frequent communication in all directions emphasis on consensus, sensitivity to feelings and human needs

6. G-T “FUNCTIONAL FLOW” • structure according to task at hand • project-centred with changing “functional” leadership • competent person makes the decision • communication only as needed • may adopt B-O through F-S if appropriate to situation

Individual and collective

In table 6.4 seven of the eight thinking systems identified by Graves are displayed. The last one – Turquoise – is left out, as it does not manifest in organisations. The importance of this theory in application to over-cultural dynamics cannot be overestimated. The colour code on the left side must be noted. Beck23 added the colours during his work in South Africa, because he struggled to get people from different nationalities (who were saying the same thing) to hear one another. He decided to allocate colours to the original codes of Graves.24 Three decades later, the colour code is still in use. The second column of table 6.4 contains important information that is incorporated in the BeQ. The column indicates the thinking structure or fractal of the specific structure. Beige does not have a fixed organising pattern; Beige people go where the food or money is.25 The research of Viljoen and Laubscher26 found that the population in Africa is at least 9% Beige, and in fact this percentage is probably underestimated. Beige people are often economically inactive. However, in special cases Beige people can survive in organisations if they are left alone. If the external environment is under control, they may lead isolated lives in an organisation. Purple thinking structures organise circularly. In the middle of a tribe or a community is a leader, usually an elder or a father.27 The rest of the community serves the needs of 106

Chapter 6: Engagement in diverse workspaces: An African and international application

the elder. It is a collective system and the tribe is important. Identity is defined in terms of others, the land and the sky. Often totem animals are chosen and the tribe inhibits the spirit of that animal.28 Purple people are peaceful and interpret things very literally. The stranger may just be a real angel. It is important for organisations to understand that in emerging economies at least 65% of workers are Purple.29 That means that they are collective and that relationships come first. They excel at story-telling and the use of metaphors, but do not deal well with direct harsh criticism. They have to see their leader often (see the structure where the leader is in the middle). It is important to Purple people that organisational strategy is translated into metaphors that are meaningful to them. At this stage it is also important to emphasise that thinking systems have nothing to do with intelligence.30 About 15% of the people we measured in South Africa are Red. Red people ask: “How can I get power?” It is important to them to be seen to win and to achieve. Short-term targets work well. The strategy of “Employee of the month” works well (only for Red people). They have energy to start every day afresh and make good salespeople and brokers. Laubscher31 explains that every colour has a low and a high version. Low Red people feel entitled and want instant gratification. High Red people are hero-like. They are ready to save the world. It is an individualistic thinking system that asks “I” questions. It may be seen as power-driven by other worldviews. About 10% of organisations in South Africa have a Blue thinking structure.32 As can be seen in table 6.4, their thinking structure has the archetype of an organisation. A Blue employee is quite happy to follow career-path development strategies in order to make progress in the organisation. Blue people ask “right or wrong” and organisational questions. Blue is a collective thinking system and employees with Blue thinking structures want to save money today to have a good retirement in the future. They are conservative in this way. They are loyal, and attempt to stay in an organisation for a long period of time. We need Blue people in organisations for standard operating procedures, compliance, policies and procedures. Programmes such as behaviour-based safety programmes are Blue. The challenge in most organisations in emerging economies is how to get Red and Purple people to be interested in Blue strategies.33 About 4% of the population in South Africa is Orange.34 Again the system oscillates between an individualistic and collective system and where Blue is collective, Orange emerges as individualistic. This individualistic system asks: “How can I be successful?” Orange people wheel and deal, and want to make money and be successful. Good things in life are appreciated and enjoyed. People who play the stock exchange are most probably Orange. Corporates must make money for shareholders, and therefore Orange thinking is crucial in profit-driven organisations.

107

Employee engagement in a South African context

Green people ask collective questions – they want to give back. It is a collective system that is concerned with the growth of people, systems and the health of the earth. It becomes philanthropic. Green people are often chastised in organisations for not managing performance quickly enough, or for not taking the part of the organisation but that of the people or the underdog. Beck35 insists that the Constitution of South Africa is written in Green – to be inclusive. Today, the question might be whether it should not have been written in Yellow. Yellow is a thinking system that is very rare. In the research done by Laubscher36 only 0.05% of South Africans display this thinking system. Yellow people have functional thinking – they focus on the real issue at hand. Where Green people are egoless (they assume that people are all equal), Yellow people ask what is needed for a specific situation. It is the only worldview that can see the beauty of all the other worldviews, and then weave them together in a way that can be functional and congruent.37 Yellow can see when Purple is needed, when Red can add value, when Blue structure is needed, when Orange entrepreneurship and risk-taking must happen and when Green inclusion is critical. Yellow is greatly under-represented in terms of thinking structure in the general population in emerging economies.38 The same applies to Turquoise. For Turquoise people, interplanetary awareness is alive and well. Often words are not needed, as Turquoise can hear what needs to be heard.39 Beck40 explains that there is no tipping point yet – no majority that will create a shift in global thinking systems. Laubscher41 warns correctly that we should not spend our energy on becoming Yellow or Turquoise, but rather discover where the world needs us. The universal leadership challenge is how Orange and Blue leadership can take Purple and Red workers into executing organisational strategy. Engagement and human niches It is becoming very clear that the drivers of engagement are different for different human niches. Beige people will engage over a very short time for the purpose of survival. Purple people will engage to serve the needs of their family and community. Red people will engage if they feel that they may win and gain power. Blue people will engage if the rules are followed, if the organisation is ethical and if there are long-term incentives. Orange people will engage if they view it as a vehicle to optimise the system, while their personal meets are met. Green people will engage if there is a growth dynamic and inclusivity. Yellow people will engage if, firstly, they are still in the organisation and secondly if they are allowed to optimise the organic whole. Turquoise people will seldom be found in organisations, due to the specific question of existence that the individual poses – namely how the globe can be sustained in relation to the cosmos.

108

Chapter 6: Engagement in diverse workspaces: An African and international application

The next chapter presents the case study of Interstate Bus Lines, where human niches and engagement have been used to inform organisational strategy with sustainable, exponential outcomes.

Conclusion Different thinking systems ask different questions and therefore behave differently, judge differently and differ in meaning-making. In particular, the archetypal thinking systems / human niches should be considered when engaging with them.42 This aspect is so critical to leadership that it cannot be ignored. If leaders can understand the thinking structures of the people in their systems, then they can adapt communication, strategy, reward, recognition, discipline and cultural issues accordingly. The BeQ describes how these thinking systems manifest in the part of the approach that deals with the over-culture. This understanding is extremely important in creating the conditions in which employees in multi-cultural settings can engage. As a Croatian business leader explains in Viljoen (2015): “If you have healthy soil the plants will be healthy. Organic agriculture teaches that you give everything to the soil, not the plants. If you change the way of thinking, there will be a time where in years your soil will be free of pesticides.” As a Purple business leader, this manager spoke in metaphor. Understanding of the soil (the human conditions) that specific employees need to bring their voices to the organisational table can greatly assist business leaders to construct sustainable companies.

A MULTI-CULTURAL SENSITIVE MEASUREMENT OF ENGAGEMENT Introduction The BeQ is an organisational enquiry that describes organisational culture and levels of engagement in the social system. It is an attempt at understanding not only what the need is for an individual to bring his or her voice to the organisational table; it is also of paramount importance to understand the contextual lens through which perceptions of respect, trust, support and other engagement factors that are typically measured by engagement studies are formed.43 Without understanding, in the first place, the thinking structures that create the perception, and ultimately causally determine the behaviour of a workspace, interventions will be designed and implemented based on symptoms and not primary causes.

109

Employee engagement in a South African context

The focus of the BeQ The BeQ describes the interplay between assumptions and perceptions that are alive and well in organisations around constructs that contribute to the unleashing of individual voices, contributions and gifts in a qualitative and quantitative way. It further studies the containing dynamics of the team in which the individual functions.44 These dynamics are critical for determining whether the individual will bring his or her voice to the organisational table. Procedures and practices may not necessarily be conducive to engagement. The organisational “doing” may not support the strategic intent of leadership or the agreed-upon strategy. The BeQ describes dynamics on the individual, group and organisational level, as it pertains to human energy in the system that will manifest in levels of engagement to perform the organisational doing. Lastly, the BeQ presents the over-cultural dynamics that enable leaders to contextually interpret engagement dynamics.45 Ultimately an organisational narrative or story emerges that is validated during feedback sessions by everyone who participated in the study. An example of this way of reporting can be seen in chapter 7 in the case of Interstate Bus Lines. Three stories are told – a visual picture is presented, a quantitative data sheet is provided, and a narrative report is written by PhD researchers.

Human niches and the BeQ

110

•

The trans-level analysis that forms a critical part of the BeQ provides valuable information on the human niche distribution in the organisation. This assists leaders to lead in a stratified manner. If they know that their workers are collective and family-orientated and Purple, leaders could be assisted to tell stories, use more metaphors or parables, and relate first before work begins. In Purple societies the organisation must consult and acknowledge the elders in the community.46

•

If the workers are egocentric and power-driven, it would be helpful to set weekly targets and give a lot of positive reinforcement. Nominating an employee-of-theweek works well here. This thinking system can be described as a Red human niche.47

•

For Blue employees with sacrificial thinking systems and a long-term focus, it is critical to provide rules and regulations and long-term outcomes. These thinking systems function on loyalty. Employees don’t want to tell their leaders that they are performing well. Performance must be noticed without speaking about it.

•

Orange employees need challenges with an upside. This is a challenge that they can meet at times, but fail it too if the outcome is not met. If there is not a calculated risk that this thinking system can negotiate, they lose interest.

•

For yet another group of employees, Green, growth opportunities and equal treatment are critical. For them, it is all about giving back. They have a philanthropic nature.

Chapter 6: Engagement in diverse workspaces: An African and international application

The BeQ methodology – practical considerations An ethnographic mixed-methods approach is followed when a BeQ enquiry is conducted. In-depth interviews with a phenomenological nature, data gathered from questionnaires, narrative stories, focus-group sessions and joint action-plan sessions are open-coded. Axial coding and elective coding are done on emerging themes and ultimately the story of the organisation is told in terms of over-cultural dynamics. The volume of theory to be incorporated in a BeQ enquiry, and the implications of data to be gathered, must be discussed upfront with line management. Engaging with a large section of the workforce has significant time implications and may even lead to a loss in production.48 The BeQ has been translated into Sotho, Twi, Afrikaans, French, Spanish and Mandarin. Sixty-four questions are necessary to determine the constructs validly. The organisation can then generate specific questions to measure what is important to the leadership. Sometimes companies prefer to measure behaviour-based safety dynamics, highperformance teaming dynamics, learning organisation practices, values translation or retention strategies. A quarter of the questions of the BeQ can thus be customised to measure strategies and conditions aligned with organisational strategy. Typically, the I-engage, we-engage and org-engage parts are incorporated in a BeQ study. These parts are described in more detail below. For the trans-engage part it is advisable to start with the spiral dynamic section and later incorporate alternative measures of national cultural dynamics.

I-ENGAGE, WE-ENGAGE, THEY-ENGAGE and TRANS-ENGAGE The I-engage, we-engage, they-engage and trans-engage formulae are statistically derived through regression analysis, factor analysis and inferential statistics that cluster the most important weightings around participants’ responses. This is done to determine what the sample being surveyed needs at a personal, team and organisation/company level to engage, and to what extent certain constructs drive engagement more than others. Each formula is informed by five constructs that contribute to engagement on that domain. Each construct has five subconstructs derived from an intensive grounded theory study.i These formulae help focus the attention required into the optimal areas, so that initiatives and remedial programmes embarked on later will yield optimal results.49 These formulae are important because what drives engagement for one group/ organisation will not drive engagement in another. This is described in more detail later in the chapter. The BeQ can be viewed as a diagnostic tool for OCD consultants. It can further assist in the pre- and postmeasure of interventions to determine the return on investment i

The study is described in the 2008 PhD study and the book Inclusive Organisational Transformation (2015) by the author.

111

Employee engagement in a South African context

of organisational transformational strategies and OCD initiatives. OCD consultants should not subscribe to one-size-fits-all approaches, since these too simplistically try to categorise human behaviour, rather than to understand the interplay of unique dynamics. The BeQ endeavours to capture unique principles and dynamics that play out in a specific organisational context, so as to provide focus areas for customised interventions that are aligned to what the organisation requires at a specific time. By also taking into account country, contextual and industry-specific indicators, a unique result is made available to every department in every company embarking on a BeQ transformational initiative. The focus is on activating passive human potential in the system. Each of the different formulae are briefly discussed below. I-engage The I-engage formula has a reliability of .78 (r=.78). A reliability of 0.8 is viewed as having psychometric properties. The alpha values are 0.72 < α < 0.84 for each of the subscales. The I-engage formula studies the willingness of the individual to bring who he or she is to the organisational table, to continue to attempt to speak up and to have self-regard. They can speak up from a stance of confidence and from corporative citizenship behaviour; that is the willingness to act as if the organisation were their own.50 As explained during the conceptualisation of the concept of engagement, attempts are made to enhance levels of voice in the organisation. “Voice” here implies that the individual has the ability and willingness to bring what is in his or her head and heart to the outer world, so that the unique seeing and knowing that that person has, are shared for the benefit of the whole. A combination of the constructs measured by the I-engage formula provides an indication of the willingness of an individual to bring his or her value to the organisational table. It thus describes the willingness at individual level to engage as a result of individual contributors. The constructs were identified in the PhD study of Viljoen.51 To put it in another way, the I-engage describes the willingness to engage due to the confidence that individuals have in their own views, their self-regard, the willingness to continue to try again and again and to consult what should be, the willingness to take personal responsibility for their own voices and lastly the degree to which they are willing to act as if the organisation is their own. The individual psychological process that enables the individual to be engaged, apathetic or disengaged is described by the I-engage.52 A person cannot really get someone else to engage. All work is self-work. The I-engage is expressed as a formula that statistically indicates how much energy should be spent in a specific environment to stimulate this internal willingness to engage. Other factors that determine the willingness to engage that is not rooted on individual level (such as whether it is safe to voice different viewpoints) are considered in the We-engage and 112

Chapter 6: Engagement in diverse workspaces: An African and international application

other formulae discussed below. In figure 6.1 the I-engage formula is displayed for five business units in the same multi-cultural organisation. It is clear how different various areas in the same organisation can be – and that one-size-fits-all solutions do not really have sustainable implications. The percentages in the formulae describe the weighting of the specific aspects of engagement. In Ghana, for example, a combination of teamwork, the impact of supervision, whether employees feel respected and consulted, and trust, contributes to more than 90% of the various BeQ subconstructs. In this case, supervisory development and team development sessions could have a significant impact on the employee’s willingness to engage. Ghanaian organisation I_ENGAGE = = .26* TEAMWORK (INTRA- AND INTER-TEAM)+ 24 *SUPERVISION+ .18*RESPECT +.13*BEING CONSULTED+.11*TRUST +.2 Tanzanian organisation I_ENGAGE = =.26* SUPPORT+ .26*TEAMWORK (INTRA- AND INTER-TEAM)+ .17*ALIGNMENT DOING + .15* CARING+ +.12*INCLUSION +.03 Australian organisation I_ENGAGE = 28*CONNECTION + .21*SUPERVISOR SKILL (DOING AND BEING) + .19*TEAMWORK + .13*FAIRNESS +.18 Peruvian organisation I_ENGAGE = 22*CARING + .21*CONNECTION +.17*ALIGNMENT (DOING) + .15*LEADERSHIP EXAMPLE +.15*SUPPORT +.10 International expert exploration team I_ENGAGE = = .32*CONSULTED+ .22*ALIGNMENT (ORGANISATIONAL) + .19*SUPPORT + .14*ACCOUNTABILITY+ .13 Figure 6.1: Relationships in a multi-cultural organisation

Figure 6.1 shows that in Ghana relationships are very important. The direct supervisor also plays a very important role in the lives of the team (this can be supported by the Purple worldviews of the organisation as described above). In Tanzania interpersonal relationships are critical. The dynamic in Australia is very different: here, mateship is important. However, it also creates dynamics. There is a politeness that restrains supervisors from giving direct feedback and a lifestyle issue that leads to a more relaxed approach to work. In Peru, the most important thing is that “I feel cared for”. One can

113

Employee engagement in a South African context

see how important the direct line manager is in both Ghana and Peru. Direction from the leader is respected. This is different from Australia, where the skill of the supervisor and not his or her position will determine whether he or she is respected. In the last example, where an internationally deployed expert team is presented, one can see how important it is to them to be consulted, to know what they must do, to feel supported in their virtual space and that if a person commits to do something, it will be done. It is important to know that each group or organisation will have a different I-engagement formula. From a statistical point of view, the sample size should be bigger than 100 to do the relevant statistics effectively. This also introduces another point of concern – no BeQ report can be written unless at least eight people have participated. The reason for this is that individual voices can be protected in the group opinion.53 The I-engage forms a critical part of the BeQ results as it synthesises the areas of intervention. It articulates significance for self-direction, for intervention and for strategy in an attempt to arrive at a high-performance culture. We-engage The we-engage formula studies the dynamics that co-construct conditions for the individual to bring his or her voice to the organisation. Disfunctionality in this domain will create a human process loss. Theoretically, a group must be synergetic. This means that one plus one must make three. This is seldom the case in organisations, as energy loss happens as people form groups, and groups have dynamics of their own.54 However, if individuals cannot bring who they are to the organisational table, then there is a human process loss. Understanding how to minimise this loss can contribute to human energy in systems to perform the task at hand. The we-engage formula is not interpreted to the same degree as the I-engage. Firstly, the amount of detail provided is overwhelming. Secondly, the work to be done is often individual work. The information provided from this formula can be very meaningful to both the supervisor and the HR practitioner as it provides information on how to enhance the group dynamics in a team. Org-engage The org-engage formula studies the pathologies in organisational systems. Leaders in organisations often say one thing and then do something totally different. They may say that they have an open-door policy, but in fact no one would dare enter that space. Alternatively, they may say “safety first”, but reward production. It becomes important in organisations that what we say and what we do are congruent. The org-engage describes this congruence.55

114

Chapter 6: Engagement in diverse workspaces: An African and international application

The org-engage is particularly important to the executive team. It provides information about levels of trust in the organisation, levels of buy-in in the strategy, alignment to strategy, belief in the values, the actual living of the values and how ethical the system believes “they” are. It is important to mention here that this is not necessarily feedback to the real executive team – employees lower in the system report to the expectations and experience of the THEY – the people at the top of the organisation. These dynamics are often inherited by a new CEO, who fondly believes he or she can change things, only to find that the same issues for which the lower level blamed the previous leadership are now at his or her front door. Organisations should be healed systemically, or else the same dysfunctional dynamics will repeat themselves and new leaders may be set up for failure. It is critical to remember that organisations are like marriages. George Damien, a Ghanaian friend, once told me “you never stop getting married”. The same applies to leading organisations. They are never fixed, healed or functioning optimally. However, leaders should strive to enable organisational group dynamics to be as functional as possible, rather than dysfunctional. In this org-engage domain we study the congruence between what we say we do and what is nationally done. This domain studies the congruence in the system, whether policies and processes support the intent of the organisation, whether the organisation is viewed as ethical and whether the system believes that the organisation is sustainable – that means that workers have confidence in the future of the organisation and also that the company will be able to adapt to challenges in the external world.56 Trans-engage The trans-engage formula is concerned about the dynamics in the over-culture. This includes the politics, the power dynamics and the time-orientation of the direct society and the worldview of the direct containing social system. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary57 defines the term “trans” as “characterized by having certain groups of atoms on opposite sides of the longitudinal axis of a double bond or of the plane of a ring in a molecule.” The “trans” here is applied in a social setting, describing a knowing field that holds the different options and opinions – the worldviews and power dynamics of the over-culture.58 To simplify, it is the dynamics of the containing system. It is this consideration that provides unique insight into the collective psyche of the organisation and the society in which it is contained. Through careful interpretation of the transengage dynamic and over-cultural dynamics, an ethnographic property is assigned to the BeQ.

115

Employee engagement in a South African context

Benefits of the BeQ philosophy The BeQ philosophy not only optimises the levels of engagement in organisations. The following are added benefits of doing a BeQ study in the right way:59 • • • • • • •

Employees feel included and consulted. This impacts BeQ subconstructs such as respect. Employees feel that they are part of creating solutions. This impacts BeQ subconstructs such as ownership and corporate citizenship behaviour. Employees understand themselves better. This impacts BeQ subconstructs such as regard. HR practitioners and line managers understand where to intervene in a system. Specific interventions can be identified at individual, group and organisational level. Interventions can be customised for a specific environment. Underlying beliefs in the system can be documented and shifts in the organisational psyche can be quantified.

Conclusion Tools that do not take the multi-faceted worldviews of their workforce into account, may design interventions and strategies that are an outflow of their own worldview. An intervention may often fail if it is not congruent with the colourful diverse nature of the organisational psyche. An engagement study that can determine the spread of the various thinking structures in the organisation and further establish where in the organisation what questions are being asked, may assist greatly in ensuring that congruent interventions are presented, that there can be a differentiated approach to strategies and interventions and lastly that custom-made solutions to systemic problems are presented, rather than one-size-fits-all large-scale organisational interventions.

ENGAGEMENT DYNAMICS IN AFRICA Introduction Contrary to the picture of Africa the world generally sees on television – a crippling AIDS crisis, Ebola threat, brutal civil wars, Western efforts to influence democracy and offer debt relief, and wild animals – and in movies, for example Blood Diamond and Tsotsi, there is a great sense of humanity and wisdom in Africa. People who have visited the continent have all experienced that the majority of Africans are humble, friendly, clever, spiritual and eager-to-learn people.60 People in Tanzania describe themselves as giraffes – humble animals that cry inside.61 This is typical of a Purple society. Organisations that conduct business in Africa today have a sacred opportunity to work with the rhythm and nature of the local community and leave behind a truly sustainable legacy.

116

Chapter 6: Engagement in diverse workspaces: An African and international application

As a result of its intangible and universal nature, story-telling in Africa has survived colonialism and Christianity – it could not be suppressed, manipulated or taken away.62 Most African cultures are oral cultures and are, therefore, imbued with a large measure of conviviality. Story-telling is a core competency of leaders in Africa,63 as a person’s social skill will determine his or her social standing; and the social insight, sensitivity and technique of a manager may be enhanced by the ability to tell a good story.64 Myths, legends, parables, fables and rituals speak of and for every person.65 Christie, Lessem and Mbigi66 describe African people as natural story-tellers. African leadership could offer this gift to the business world. Hofstede67 warns that, if working internationally, people have a tendency to act from their own experiences, their local culture. The external culture of the country in which the organisation operates will influence the organisational culture.68 Western leadership should take these diversity dynamics into account when operating in African countries. The next section presents two African case stories. The BeQ was used in both cases to describe over-cultural dynamics and other engagement factors.

Doing business in Tanzania The case organisation In the gold mines of an operation just south of Lake Victoria, the precious yellow metal is mined each day. The sound of heavy machinery and the movement of vehicles are the norm at the mine, which produced around half a million ounces of gold in 2001 and increased this figure by nearly 15% in 2002. Prior to the mine’s opening, the population of the local village was under 30 000; today it is home to around 120 000 people, 80% of whom depend in one way or another on the mine. The mine reached a significant achievement by producing three million ounces of gold in 2005, contributing significantly to the gold production of Tanzania. During 2005, the mine owners, who up until that point had been making extensive use of contractors to fulfil several of their mining functions, decided to go owner-mining whereby they would purchase the contractors, their staff and their equipment and mine as a single, united entity. Logistically this had huge implications in terms of the increase in staff size, increased use of facilities on the mine, maintenance and operation of equipment, integration of a wide variety of skilled and unskilled staff into an existing workforce and the emotional and diversity components of integrating people (and their mind-sets) from just about every corner of the globe. The workforce at the time had expanded from 480 full-time employees with an additional 1  685 full-time contractors. Fourteen contractors on site employed the remaining

117

Employee engagement in a South African context

workers. An integration effort was needed, not only with employees, but also in terms of processes, structures and operations. An engagement study was conducted to understand the mind-set of the workforce and the contractors. The research suggested that the workforce valued practical guidelines on conducting tasks, had realistic expectations, and needed concrete and specific stepby-step instructions and specific outcomes. The workforce was described as trusting, kind and considerate, sensitive and gentle and extremely observant of the behaviour of their superiors. The workforce described the management as aloof, private, reserved and hard to get to know. The results were surprising to management, as they expected the workforce to request better remuneration. The results of the climate study indicated clearly that rather than simply undertaking a monetary intervention, supervisory development, soft-skills training and strategy alignment also needed attention. The engagement transformational strategy A transformational strategy was drafted and proposed interventions were suggested. An emotional intelligence journey based on the theory of Bar-On (2–3) was implemented in the organisation. As the entire management system (Exco, Mancom, HODs and supervisors) had been influenced by this restructuring effort, a specific organisational development intervention, namely, a self-mastery process based on emotional intelligence theory, was implemented. All those leaders who were involved participated in this three-day humanistic facilitated intervention that focused on systems thinking principles, the new world of work and the way in which personal values relate to organisational values. During the interventions, specific emphasis was placed on developing emotional intelligence, the ability to function well in multi-cultural settings and how to enhance engagement. The Exco and Mancom teams participated in a facilitated team-building session in an external venue. Personality-type differences were used as the basis of this humanistic organisational development process. During this session the emphasis was on understanding the similarities and differences between individuals, deciding on roles and responsibilities and sharing each other’s expectations. The value statement of the organisation was revisited and the group co-created a purpose for the team. Two weeks after this session the 26 most senior employees in the organisation engaged in a psychoanalytical Tavistock event, which focuses on dealing with the unconscious dynamics within the group.69 Issues such as political gamesmanship, power plays and splits within the organisation were explored. The reasons for trust issues in the organisation were explored in a facilitated context. Individuals were given the opportunity to provide feedback on the impact of their behaviour on others, and they agreed on behaviour and 118

Chapter 6: Engagement in diverse workspaces: An African and international application

actions that should be initiated, continued or terminated. Direct feedback was given and all the “unspeakables” – such as the dynamics of expatriates versus locals – were addressed. It was decided that all the natural teams (teams that worked together in their day-to-day operations) should engage in team development sessions in order to optimise group dynamics. The decision was also made to adopt a humanistic facilitation approach as described by Rogers,70 which is based on emotional intelligence theory, during these team development sessions. In this way behaviour would be normalised at the same time as the unintended impact of behaviour would also surface. The total workforce was involved through the application of industrial theatre focusing on diversity dynamics, stereotypes in the system and shared understanding of organisational challenges. During big systems events and through story-telling, facilitators assisted employees to focus on their own emotional intelligence skills and to co-create action plans to improve dynamics back at the workplace. These interventions focused on influencing the mind-set of staff and enhancing empathy, self-regard and reality testing. The metaphor of climbing Mount Kilimanjaro together was used to create shared understanding of the task at hand at the mine – namely working together in a respectful manner towards organisational success. Results of intervention No follow-up climate study was done to determine changes in the inter-organisational dynamics, as the management team changed significantly. However, eight of the 13 group members in top management in the organisations were promoted within the two years after the interventions. A post-measure EQi was done to determine individual growth on selected members of the Mancom team. The group that participated in the re-measure consisted of five expatriates and eight locals. The total emotional intelligence score increased from 104 to 110. In the sample group of 13 leaders who participated in the post-measure, the total emotional intelligence scores of only three leaders did not improve. As two individuals whose scores decreased had gone through personal trauma, it can be deduced that only one score decreased without any specific reason. It may be concluded with statistical certainty that the emotional intelligence journey delivered the desired results in improving the emotional intelligence i-scores on the Assertiveness, Self-regard, Interpersonal Relationship and Assertiveness subscales. Although not statistically significant, the other two subscales that were targeted for development during the design of the emotional intelligence journey, namely Problemsolving and Optimism, also improved by more than five points each.

119

Employee engagement in a South African context

It was the goal of management to integrate the two workforces without losing production time. In the end production was stopped only for a one-hour celebration. No production time was lost and no lost-time injuries occurred. In addition, external international auditors documented the success of the integration and identified the organisational development initiatives as the factors contributing to the achievement.

Doing business in Ghana The case organisation Initially, an engagement study was undertaken due to low production outputs and a general sense that the people in Ghana were lazy. The question was also asked whether a third-world country could really comply with international safety and quality standards. Little did the executive management team expect the workers to shift from apathetic to engaged in nine months, for the international safety prize to be won by this mine (and for eight consecutive years after that) and for all expectations to be exceeded in less than a year. The results of the BeQ research showed a very different picture than the original assumptions of the executive management team.71 Workers did not feel respected. This mostly happened for the following reasons: •

• • • •

From where they lived to where they worked was a distance of 22 km. It took an hour and a half to drive on the deteriorating road that was often washed away by the tropical rains. The food was not cooked properly during lunch times. There was no water in the pits of the mines. There were not enough showers, so miners could not go home clean. The leaders did not speak to them.

By the time the research team became involved, the management was not willing to invest more money in an asset that did not produce an outcome. Innovative ways had to be found to make sense of the situation. The engagement transformational strategy Ghana is a country with 78 tribes. It is close to the equator, with an average temperature of 39° Celsius and humidity mostly around 98%. There are two seasons – summer and the rainy season. Three months a year the harmattan wind blows from the Sahara, and everything is red with dust.

120

Chapter 6: Engagement in diverse workspaces: An African and international application

It became very clear during initial conversations that Ghanaians who worked in the case organisation showed a Purple thinking system, as described by Laubscher.72 The design of the engagement transformational strategy relied heavily on this diagnosis. Firstly, before the engagement study began, the local nannas (chiefs) were consulted. The research team explained that they were there to listen, and asked permission to speak to the people. This was a very helpful move. Everyone was willing to share their views. Employees initially reported not feeling consulted. Initially they did not trust the engagement process and although more and more people (who had not necessarily been invited to the specific session) attended, initially little was said. However, very soon the allocated room was too small to contain everyone and while the research team was there for the next five years a lovely vibe and energy were unleashed – everyone wanted to share their story. If not everyone was able to speak to the researchers, notes were written on whatever material could be found, often in the local language Twi, so to hear every story translation was needed to make sense of each and every piece of information. The enquiry approach had two phases: first the research was conducted and then feedback was given. This formed part of the larger process of organisational development and change. During the feedback sessions some hilarious moments occurred. When the researcher said something with which everyone agreed, the group would shout “EXACTLY” with one voice. Although the request was that the questionnaires would be completed anonymously, in Ghana people insist on writing their names on their forms – they feel their voice must be heard. After the presentation of the BeQ, a Ghanaian leader asked why foreigners make this so difficult. “If you want guests, you need to make our house warm, and are our organisations not our employees’ houses?” This seemed to be a fair question to our leaders. Do we spend energy in creating a sense of belonging, in a culture that can be described as warm and in a workplace that creates psychological safety for its employees? The management team tried for years to sort out the situation with the deteriorating road. Government would not allow only 20 km of a 600 km road to be repaired. If they wanted that strip to be improved, the whole road had to be improved. This was simply not profitable. The EXCO team decided to drive the bus for a week. After one ride the HR director reported that he had a terrible headache. In order to help with his headache, all the windows were opened (but the dust from the bad road blew in). The general manager removed one of the big scrapers from the pit and used 121

Employee engagement in a South African context

it on the road in a daily attempt to improve the part of the road used by the mine. Of course not having a scraper in the pit led to a loss in production. During a joint actionplanning session on how to solve the issue, a group member came up with the idea of changing the service-level agreements with the contractors of the buses. It was agreed that over the next six years all buses had to be equipped with air conditioners. In that way, the windows could be closed and people would not arrive at work or at home red from the dust. This was the core of the issue of feeling disrespected. The HR executive immediately implemented this approach, and over years the fleet of buses was equipped with air conditioners – but slowly: by the fifth year, 40% of buses were still without air conditioners. As researcher, I felt very humiliated that what we had promised did not happen within the time constraints. I explained to the group that we were running late with our plan. The most humane response ever embraced me. The group ensured me that as long as things were improving, they were happy. I learned something about being African that day. Employees reported that they did not feel respected because the food that was provided was not cooked properly.73 This problem was relatively easy to sort out. Ghanaian food is stew-like and takes a long time to prepare properly. (The Ghanaians only say “proper”). Due to ineffective scheduling the cooks did not have enough time to prepare food the proper way. This was sorted out quickly by implementing a new schedule. The general manager (GM) took the research very seriously. He wanted to know how many people participated daily, and what he could do to make things better quickly. The day after the complaint that there was no water in the mines, this issue was resolved. This quick positive response really added to the trustworthiness of the process. The GM also installed water at the workplace and close to the bus rank in the village. The lesson here was that we got the concept of “not feeling respected” totally wrong. Some instruments that are used internationally also ask the wrong questions, and will not get to the core of concepts like respect. Ghanaians love to work. Time does not fly when they are at work. It is a concept that they do not grasp. You also do not work to have time off. You work to live. Ghanaians take pride in their work. They do not want to arrive at work dirty. Neither do they want to arrive home covered in red dust. Eating is a ritual – it is a very important part of being Ghanaian. To offer food that is ill-prepared is truly disrespectful. This is the case with Purple employees.74 It is also very important for them to connect with their leaders – if only to see them. Much to the dismay of the corporate office, which felt that production was down already, the GM implemented a road show every Wednesday.

122

Chapter 6: Engagement in diverse workspaces: An African and international application

Results of interventions In eight months the mine in the study won the international safety shield of its multinational company – a wonderful performance, taking into account that only a few months earlier they were last in line for this award. The BeQ was re-measured for five years. In the consecutive BeQ measure the local Ghanaians reported that they were respected and indicated higher levels of engagement. A complete case study, which also reports on the impact on productivity and other business indicators, can be found in the book Inclusive Organisational Development.75

Conclusion African dynamics can easily be misinterpreted. Organisations that extend their footprint into this diverse continent must realise that different thinking structures are at play here. Rather than assume that people in Africa must be similar to employees in firstworld countries, an in-depth ethnographical perspective informed especially by human niche theory can assist greatly with translation of strategy, understanding organisational dynamics and the strategies for enhancing engagement.

ENGAGEMENT DYNAMICS IN OTHER COUNTRIES Australia It was hard for a South African researcher to do engagement study research in Australia. Australians are by nature reluctant to consider insights from consultants from other countries. Here we worked over a period of five years with more than 4  000 people. Initially the groups could be described as reluctant or even passive or aggressive. We were not “mates”. However, things changed quickly as the groups realised that the intent of the researchers was not to superimpose a model from another world on them, but rather to consult on what was important to them. Australians do not necessarily value things that do not come from Australia. It is my view that it is more in the “how” than the “what”. Often consultants and managers visit Australia and from a patterning perspective tell them how to do things better – without even considering why things were done in a specific way in the first place. Australians sometimes also take offence at the use of language. For example, the head of a department in another organisation wanted to press a deadline. He used a picture of a rifle and the cartoon had a slogan saying “give it to me or else …” The Australians were not amused at all and a formal complaint of disrespect was lodged. The same cartoon had the whole of Ghana laughing for a week. The Australians who participated in the study were particularly respectful and polite. People do not necessarily disagree out loud – mateship is important.76 Feedback that is not

123

Employee engagement in a South African context

positive also presents problems and is avoided as long as possible. Further, lifestyle issues are important. People feel that the work does not necessarily have be finished by the end of the day, and can continue tomorrow. For expatriates who come from other settings this presents a bit of a problem, as it is more laid-back than they are used to. The benchmark of engagement showed that most Australians are Blue – that is, rulefollowing. It is however still a collective system and therefore reveals mateship. It is a compliant system. Blue systems often have “family secrets” and do not speak out about their organisation in a critical way. In Australian systems where trust relations have been compromised, participating in an electronic BeQ study can increase the negative dynamic. Employees were suspicious and wanted to know whether their questionnaires could be tracked. There also was an 18% difference between questionnaires that were completed electronically and those that were completed anonymously in the class. This dynamic confirmed the assumption that “we do not speak out”, “we protect our own”, “the neighbours should not know.” Rules are followed if no one is watching. What was interesting though is that Australia measured as feminine and indirect. In the feedback, I playfully said that they were big teddy-bears. The big miners all agreed with me. They referred me to a rugby game that they lost against the Springboks, to see how they cried.77 The Australian focus groups enjoyed technology and gadgets. Conducting paper-based research was found boring but technology worked wonders. Due to the hierarchical structure it was very important to give feedback on the overall findings to the top leader first. These unseen hierarchical structures should be respected. The collective of Australia is very inclusive – it was one of the only systems where I ever worked where every group asked for socials after work to be able to connect more. They also incorporated their elders to watch their children (maybe to get the tax rebate), but family dynamics, children, brothers and sisters and friends all form part of the social conversations. Maybe due to the small percentage of Aboriginals in America, and the almost non-representation of this grouping in the workplace, the dynamic of the first nations was not recorded in the organisational BeQ, or in the interpretation above. There still seems to be a real disconnect between Aboriginals and the rest of Australia. It manifested, for example, in more than four incidents where the researchers were warned to be careful of Aboriginals due to the risk of pick-pocketing. People are accepted because of what they know and not because of their authority. In order to do business in Australia, one must be very careful not to appear spoilt, arrogant or thinking one knows better. Being true to oneself and authenticity will take one a long way. The collective nature of the group also asks one to tell stories and use parables. A warning though: they cannot be Purple stories. Metaphors or cynical humorous stories can be very effective, but not soppy stories. 124

Chapter 6: Engagement in diverse workspaces: An African and international application

China “One is respected just as much as the size of one’s foot.” Engagement in China presented very interesting dynamics. Three organisations participated in the engagement studies and more than 8  000 Chinese employees formed the sample groups. The research described below formed part of conducting an engagement study in a Chinese bank. On every occasion members of the Chinese delegation were very reluctant to participate in the study. Three preparation meetings were needed before we could convince the team members to complete the forms. All the answers to questions about their direct line managers were elevated to an extent where it became clear that there was a resistance to say anything negative about their direct managers or bosses. However, as the process developed a lovely ritual was established. We greeted one another in a specific way. Bowing the upper body and greeting with both hands showed respect. Some aspects were not vocally expressed, but were played out in a dramatic way that created a lot of enjoyment. Ultimately, eyes were fixed on the leader for approval. Although it was anticipated that a large amount of Blue would be visible in the system due to the belief structures of Confucianism and its long-term vision, Purple was measured in both young and old. Face was kept, ritual was followed and ancestors were celebrated and consulted. Even the youngsters were cautious not to irritate the ancestors, although they denied any influence by or reliance on them. The use of first-person language (I-language) is frowned upon. Expressions of the self are in terms of the group or the collective. A hosting culture is evident. Foreigners are treated with the utmost respect, but are not truly allowed into the heart, and are made aware of the way things work there. Foreigners are advised to keep very strictly to Chinese ways if they ever want to get a glimpse of the real underlying patterns, structures and beliefs that underpin being Chinese, and therefore being part of the tribe. It became very clear that in this country relationships come first. It was not surprising to find the following three aspects measuring lowest: i) trust ii) transparency iii) inclusion. Aspects that did score well were willingness to participate, group work and buy-in to strategy.78 It will serve the consultant or business leader who is deployed to work in China well to study the delicate dynamics of this collective culture before an attempt is made to operate there. Placing relationships first and being respectful are more important than the task at hand – especially in the initial meetings.79 Understanding the dynamics in the collective Chinese psyche can also assist relationships between South African stakeholders and their Chinese business partners in South Africa.

125

Employee engagement in a South African context

CONCLUSION In this chapter the author attempted to present a rich contextual integral view of engagement, and emphasise the importance of ensuring that organisational development research or engagement study work is multi-culturally sensitive. An approach that is fluid and emerging and that allows permeable boundaries in individual, group, organisational and over-cultural domains is proposed. One such approach is the BeQ philosophy. We must listen to the stories of different people – those that they tell, and more importantly, those that are left unsaid. In our social systems we must find a way of describing or systemically presenting these stories and dynamics in order to understand the social and power landscape of the organisation. Insights gained from these narratives and stories can greatly assist leadership in understanding, firstly, the systemic interplay between individuals, groups, organisations and the over-culture; secondly, to diagnose and decide where and how to implement the interventions in order to weave the organisational dynamics in a functional way, and where there should be intervention; thirdly, to quantify the impact of an engagement transformational strategy; and lastly, to assist leadership in gathering meta-data in a compatible format. This is done to determine where leadership initially found a system, and where they left it. It may quantify the impact of their behaviour. In some cases where we did this work and business indicators declined owing to factors such as the gold price being at an ultimate low, it could still show the positive shifts in culture as far as it pertained to safety and production. The unique cultures of Tanzania, Ghana, Australia and China were taken into consideration in the discussion of engagement transformational strategies that were implemented. These results and stories form part of the research database of the BeQ, which consists of more than 55 000 participants from 42 different counties in five continents. It is clear that the universal leadership challenge is how to get Purple and Red people to implement Blue and Orange organisational initiatives. By listening closely to the workforce and the society that contains the specific organisation, insights can be gained on ensuring that this translation occurs fluidly.

126

Chapter 7 Engagement – The critical prerequisite for co-determination by Rica Viljoen

INTRODUCTION In this chapter, the practical manifestation of engagement and how it translates into high levels of trust and human energy in the system to execute the task at hand are considered. Traditionally, causal links are made between engagement and business indicators such as customer-centricity, safe behaviour and productivity.1 In this chapter an alternative approach is followed and the case study of Interstate Bus Lines (IBL) is presented. In this organisation leadership, over the last 15 years, has actively supported and invested in engagement initiatives. As the result of years of OCD work, especially engagement work, trust levels in the organisation are so positive that co-determination could be implemented successfully. After a strike arranged by the unions in the late 1990s, leadership of IBL decided to proactively invest in ensuring an inclusive culture, emotional intelligence development for every staff member in the organisation and truly engaging the workforce in strategy translation and shared decision-making. The outcome of these interventions has been not just a company that continues to grow and perform exponentially. During three national strikes over the last decade, the bus drivers of the organisation did not strike when a national strike was called by the relevant unions. Avoiding a strike for one day resulted in cost savings that largely exceeded the yearly training and development budget for the whole year. Over and above these cost savings, which occurred thanks to high levels of trust between workers and management, there was also enough capacity in the system to implement a co-determination strategy. It may seem as if management gave away power in implementing this strategy: paradoxically, management gained more power. Furthermore, IBL is one of the few organisations in South Africa that has embraced human niche theory and considered the implications thereof for the implementation of every strategy, process or procedure in the organisation. The first part of this chapter deals with the conceptualisation of co-determination. The objectives of the concept are stipulated and the benefits thereof are shared. The second part of the chapter tells the story of IBL, with an emphasis on engagement initiatives over more than a decade, which resulted in favourable conditions for the successful implementation of this strategy. The chapter ends with the prerequisites for a strategy of this nature in an emerging economy. 

127

Employee engagement in a South African context

THE CONCEPT OF CO-DETERMINATION Introduction and background The term “co-determination” refers to a concept of employee consultation and participation in company decisions.2 Employees have a major stake in the success of the enterprise: their job security depends on its survival and they can gain from increased productivity and lose from high labour costs, as these affect the firm’s ability to compete.3 In Germany labour participation in decision-making is encouraged by treating the employees as key stakeholders.4 The modern law on co-determination is found in the Mitbestimmungsgesetz (Co-determination Act) of 1976 in Germany. According to Kluge,5 Germany has the most highly developed systems of board-level co-determination; however, the concept is widely used throughout Europe with variations. The concept has a history that dates back to 1848 in Germany, when demands were put forward for the establishment of factory committees with participation rights in the creation of improved working and living conditions for workers. In 1920 Germany passed the Works Council Act, which ensured full co-determination rights in the creation of work regulations and participation rights in various personnel and finance matters.6 Broadly defined, co-determination provides for worker participation in the management process through works councils and representation on supervisory boards of private, and to a lesser extent public, organisations.7 According to the Hans Böckler-Stiftung,8 after the 1920 Works Council Act the following legislation was also passed to modify the 1920 Act: • •

•

In 1952 the Works Constitution Act established co-determination at establishment level through the works councils. In 1976 the Co-determination Act9 was passed, in which co-determination at company or group level in companies with 2 000 and more employees was established. In 2001 the Works Constitution Act of 1972 was amended, in an effort to modify the concept of co-determination to suit the prevailing environment.

Objectives of co-determination Co-determination in principle is a way of involving and binding the workers into the system, enabling them to have some say in a range of decisions that vitally affect them and their jobs.10 Some reformers argue that workers are not merely factory parts, they are citizens; and the German state aimed for a conciliatory policy between capital and labour with an underlying ideology that employee participation in decision-making would promote trust, co-operation and harmony.11 128

Chapter 7: Engagement – The critical pre-requisite for co-determination

The main objectives of co-determination stated by the Federal Ministry for Employment and Social Order12 are as follows: • •

• •

•

•

equity of capital and work co-determination at company level: this seeks to achieve a balance in the interests of the company between the employers (shareholders) and employees, who are represented by the works councils democracy in the economy representation on the boards: this can help the employees recognise mutual interests; therefore this objective was set based on the democratic principle of resolving conflict through dialogue and co-decision social development: contribution to the improvement of working people’s living and working conditions through a better consideration of employees’ interests when making company decisions control of economic power

The co-determination concept is directed at enabling co-operation between both sides and creating a productive balance of interests. Each side watches the other and counterbalances the others’ interest in a bid to stabilise the economic and social order within the company. The structure of involvement Co-determination in Germany takes place at two levels: the establishment as a place and at company level. The levels are governed by different legislation. At the former level co-determination is governed through the works council and at the latter by the Works Constitution Act.13 In Germany the 1976 Co-determination Act provided for a proportion of employees and shareholders to be represented on the supervisory boards of all companies with more than 2 000 employees, with half the seats to be occupied by the representatives of the employees or trade unions. This is because an individual employee is not usually empowered to defend his or her position at an equal level with the employer. Therefore works councils were created under the Works Constitution Act of 1976 to represent the interests of the employees in each company and to be independent of both the employer and trade unions. The work councils in Germany co-exist with any of the unions representing workers (both union and nonunion members) in the workplace.14 The works councils have more full-time representatives in the workplace than unions; however they do not have rights to call for a strike because of the collective agreements. Therefore they must have a strong relationship with unions to be more effective.15

129

Employee engagement in a South African context

The chairperson of the supervisory board, whose vote counts twice in case of a tie, is however elected by the shareholders. According to Muswaka,16 the fair representation of employees on the supervisory board forces direct negotiation and resolution of employee-based concerns. Traditionally the concerns of the employees are centred on salaries and wages and conditions of employment, yet in co-determination wider issues such as community support and environmental issues are touched on. The German 1972 Works Council Act included requirements for employers to keep employees informed on any job-related factors; the right of the employee to be heard and to request explanations for employer actions; employees to be allowed to access their personal files; and employees’ right to make complaints about the work council’s role in grievances handling.17 Other internal issues in Germany that engage co-determination are changes in the organisation of work, the introduction of new work methods, mergers and cutbacks to establishment. Muswaka18 raises a concern about the ability of worker representatives to articulate the broader issues. Prenting19 adds hiring, classifying and transferring employees as also requiring consent of the council. The work council has the right to be consulted by management regarding organisational structure, job design, work environment, manpower planning, personnel management and employee training. At company level the shareholders elect representatives who sit on the supervisory body. The supervisory board consists of members elected from both sides, with onethird of the members coming from the employee representatives. The supervisory body appoints and controls the board of management. According to Prenting,20 the major function of the supervisory board is the selection of the management board and overseeing the authority of the management of the enterprise. The board meets two to four times a year to make policy decisions for the enterprise, discussing investment decisions and selection and retention of management staff. Its size depends on the number of employees.

The benefits of co-determination The main benefit of co-determination is mutuality, as it takes into account the interests of shareholders, employees and all other stakeholders with an aim of creating sustainable value within the company that in the long term benefits all stakeholders.21 The employee representatives monitor the day-to-day business operations, are involved in the appointment and dismissal of managing directors and influence the strategic significance of the company. Employee representatives have equal status with the representatives of the shareholders. However, Kluge22 notes that the employee representative cannot outvote shareholder representatives.

130

Chapter 7: Engagement – The critical pre-requisite for co-determination

According to Prenting,23 employee representation on the supervisory boards is a critical element because worker involvement on a board that oversees management and makes policy-level decisions is important from an ideological, political and social perspective and also in terms of labour relations. However, Prenting24 argues that it is impossible to make a distinction between management decisions that concern the workers and those that do not, as all management decisions will affect the workers in one way all the other. Webster and Macun25 observe that decisions take longer to make in the co-determination process but they are then easier to implement due to trust and cooperation within the works councils. However, giving a workforce a legal right to co-decisions makes it difficult to dismiss workers.26 Some writers report that parity on supervisory boards has not led to revolutionary changes in company policy. Board-level co-determination in transnational companies can play a role in their social orientation and the way they shape their success.27 Co-determination is seen as being vested with the ultimate objective of safeguarding socio-economic stability and growth, whereas management views it as a stabilising influence on labour and management relations.28 Labour and management officials interviewed by Prenting29 concluded that work councils and not the supervisory board representation provided the more influential vehicle for worker participation in the decision-making process.

SOUTH AFRICAN EXPERIENCE OF CO-DETERMINATION Background The European style of co-determination was introduced in South Africa through the introduction of workplace forums in chapter 5 of the Labour Relations Act (LRA).30 The old system of industrial relations of 1920 was out of date and could not sustain valueadded production of goods and services. When it achieved democratic rule South Africa re-entered the international market and the imperatives of a more open economy demanded that value-added products be produced and productivity levels improved. Success in restructuring the industries and the economy lay in management and labour finding mutual ground in which to operate.31 The workplace forums were not designed to supplant unions but to compel employers to co-operate by providing workers with statutory rights of consultation and joint decisionmaking in the workplace. Work forums are not intended to undermine collect bargaining but to supplement it.32 In Germany firms are public institutions and not only the property of the shareholders, and are required to look at the interests of employees. The law provides for representation at

131

Employee engagement in a South African context

workplace level through works councils and representation at company/enterprise level through representation of employees on management boards and equal representation with shareholders on supervisory boards. The strong and political legislative support for co-determination has ensured that it has become the cornerstone of the industrial relations system.33 In South Africa workplace representation does not constitute a legally supported system. It evolved in an adversarial fashion, with black workers and their representatives maintaining a strategic distance from areas of responsibility and decision-making.34 Historically the state was hostile to the unions, particularly black unions. Thus until 1995 South Africa legislation repeatedly tried to introduce mechanisms for employee representation that were intended to supplant trade unionism, according to Webster and Macun:35 •

•

•

•

The first attempt was the Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act of 1953, which provided for the establishment of works committees to represent black workers to supplant trade unions. It was amended in 1973 to provide for the establishment of liaison committees where works committees did not exist. The Bantu Labour Relations Regulation Act of 1973 constituted the liaison committees as consultative bodies composed of equal numbers of management and worker representatives to be chaired by an appointee of the employer. The Wiehahn Commission of 1982 revisited these mechanisms. Then followed major changes to the Industrial Conciliation Act, which was later renamed the Labour Relations Act (LRA). Its most important feature was the recognition of the black trade unions. It also recommended the retention of weak forms of workplace representation in the form of works councils, which were to replace works and liaison committees. In 1996 the LRA came into effect and included provisions that allowed labour to exercise rights that they had had to fight for in the past, for example rights to consultation, joint decision-making and disclosure of information. It was significant because it introduced the rights and structures for co-determination.36

Shop stewards committees emerged in 1980 as the central communication between workers and management on the shop floor. They performed the dual function of engagement in collective bargaining and participation in problem-solving where problems arose in production.37 This is different to the situation in Germany, where the works councils are institutionally separated from collective bargaining, which takes place at industry level. During the 1990s a number of companies started to separate the above two issues by establishing joint forums with the unions that linked directly to the unions’ structure.38 Information-sharing, consultation and in some cases joint decision-making were built in 132

Chapter 7: Engagement – The critical pre-requisite for co-determination

to the joint forums. It was a departure from the Legal Task Force recommendation, which was influenced by the legislation governing German labour relations that works councils be introduced.39 Where multi-unionism existed, representation in the joint forum was proportional to union membership. Both works and liaison committees discredited workplace representation in the eyes of the unions.40 According to Pateman,41 quoted by Webster and Macun,42 workplace representation is not the same as employee involvement. The latter is much broader and incorporates a variety of schemes aimed at enhancing quality productivity and motivation amongst the workforce. Workplace representation involves formal mechanisms of management– worker interaction that seeks to institutionalise the rights of collective worker participation, including rights to information and consultation on the organisation of production and in some cases co-determination in decision-making.43 In the 1980s management in South Africa started introducing some forms of employee involvement such as briefing groups, communication schemes, quality circles, green areas and suggestion schemes, but all were limited to the immediate work environment.44 The 1992 and 1995 surveys found that a significant number of companies were embarking on employee involvement initiatives.45 Joint committees were mainly concerned about consultation. Despite the increased number of such structures, the information flow between management and workers remained limited according to Webster and Macun.46 Veldsman and Harilall47 conclude that management were using any form of employee involvement to bypass and possibly undermine trade unions. Germany has developed its co-determination approach to higher levels. For example, the German Corporate Governance Code as amended in 2013 aims to make the German corporate governance system transparent. Its purpose is to promote the trust of international and national investors, customers, employees and the general public in the management and supervision of German listed corporations.48 German corporate governance is shaped by legal tradition that dates back to 1920 and regards companies as entities that not only look after the interests of the shareholders but serve all other stakeholders.49 German companies place their employees on a par with the shareholders. South African organisational and legislative environments still lack the sophistication of the German institutionalisation. Furthermore, there may be other factors at play as to why co-determination efforts have failed so far in South Africa.

Why co-determination failed in South Africa According to Buhlungu,50 a co-determinationist model could still not be discerned in South Africa, partly because of half-hearted efforts on the part of management to address organisational efficiency constraints. This led to failure to win the co-operation of workers to make these efforts sustainable. On the other hand the trade unions have 133

Employee engagement in a South African context

not gone beyond making calls for workplace democratisation, and thus there is no clear policy on the actual content of labour’s own vision of co-determination.51 The LRA of 1996 presented the labour unions with both challenges and opportunities.52 South Africa emerged from the “apartheid workplace regime”, a social structure that allocated rights and resources unequally among differently socialised actors.53 As a result co-determination was viewed as disarming the workers, in that it promoted the idea that capitalism and the workers had common interests. However many workers and shop stewards within the trade unions viewed participation in decision-making as desirable.54 The LRA set up participatory structures, but Cressey and MacInnes55 caution about the simplistic dichotomy in which participation is viewed as incorporation (co-option) or the advance of labour. South African company law provides a unitary board structure that consists of both executive and nonexecutive directors on one board.56 The board structure entrusts both management and control to the board of directors, who are ultimately vested with universal powers. The board is therefore the focal point of the corporate governance system as it gives strategic direction to the company. Shareholders elect the directors and then vote separately on each candidate; they also ratify a list of recommended candidates.57 It was common for the chairperson of the board to be the company’s top executive and to appoint individuals to sit on the board. The roles of CEO and chairperson are now split, therefore managers are restricted when choosing their own monitors.58 However, in other companies that relationship is usually close and collegial and it undermines objectivity in choosing board members, because the two can always consult one another. Therefore doubts about bias still exist in South African corporate law. The unitary board system is a mechanism that furthers the interests of the shareholders only; the other stakeholders are given limited representation or recognition, whereas the German system is characterised by the two-tier board structure and has a stakeholder orientation. The two-tier system (management and supervisory boards), with codetermination between the employees and the shareholders on the supervisory board, is a key characteristic of the German corporate governance system.59 The South African unitary corporate governance system has a shareholder orientation that restricts the other key stakeholders from engaging in decision-making in the company. Key stakeholders contribute to the success of the company and a socially responsible business attends to the legitimate interests of all its key stakeholders.60 When comparing the two corporate governance systems, the German two-tier board system and its codetermination provision emerge as most effective in ensuring stakeholder interests. However, the German system is silent on other stakeholders (for example communities other than the shareholders and the employees). 134

Chapter 7: Engagement – The critical pre-requisite for co-determination

Key stakeholders all have a high interest in the success of the company and therefore should participate in corporate governance in order to influence decision-making. The strongest form of stakeholder participation under a stakeholder-oriented corporate governance system is board representation.61 In that respect, Muswaka puts forward three recommendations for a South African corporate governance system: • •

•

The German-based two-tier board structure should be adopted for South Africa through the amendment of the Companies Act. The German co-determination laws should be adopted with variations in the Companies Act, which should provide for the proportions of not only the employees’ and the shareholders’ representatives on the supervisory board as in Germany, but of all key stakeholders. Unlike in Germany, where the chairperson of the supervisory board (whose vote counts twice in case of a tie) is elected by the shareholders, in the South African context the chairperson should be appointed by the supervisory board.

It is of paramount importance that the literature on South African work forums be looked at in order to establish why they do not match the German works councils and why they need to be re-oriented in line with the German approach so that they fit the current environment. The following discussion is based on Webster and Macun.62 In this chapter the case study of IBL is introduced as a case organisation where codetermination was implemented successfully. In the case organisation the following aspects are critical prerequisites for the implementation of co-determination: • • • • • • •

high levels of trust high levels of engagement of the workforce alignment with strategy in-depth understanding of the thinking systems, worldviews and human niches active in the system and in society high levels of inclusivity support of top management clear understanding and congruence with social system dynamics

THE STORY OF INTERSTATE BUS LINES (IBL) Where it started The company was started on 28 April 1975 as Thaba Nchu Transport (Edms) Bpk. The first directors and shareholders were Fred Kinnear, Abel Erasmus, the late Dr James Moroka and Mohatse of Lichtenburg. All had equal shares. The company started with four buses that were bought from the late Jacob Mokheti. Services were delivered mostly to the

135

Employee engagement in a South African context

rural areas of Thaba Nchu for the purposes of shopping and to connect passengers with the train services to Bloemfontein. The purpose of the organisation was to establish locus standi in terms of the Road Transport Act, with the purpose of establishing a daily service between Thaba Nchu and Bloemfontein. In 1976 a further four buses were acquired by purchasing the bus service of Andrew Ntema. However, a request to implement a daily bus service was heavily opposed by the South African Railways and the Bantu Investment Corporation. At the same time a competitor, Greyling of Ladybrand, also launched an application for a licence. Over time this application was rejected due to claims of bribery (kick-backs). Disregarding different efforts to get the service approved, the Road Transportation Board declined the application. The organisation put in an appeal to the National Transport Commission, and ultimately the request was elevated to a special committee that focused on the investment of the state in the private sector. The case was referred to the Prime Minister of the day, John Vorster, and in December 1976 the service by Thaba Nchu Transport was approved and the first bus drove to Bloemfontein. There were only four passengers. In the meantime, the Republic of Bophuthatswana was established and Thaba Nchu became a province of the new republic. The South Sotho people of this area did not want to become citizens of Bophuthatswana and decided to relocate to a new area, 10 km south of Thaba Nchu. Botshabelo was established. People all over the province who were homeless moved to Botshabelo, which became the fastest-growing city in South Africa. The name of the organisation changed to Interstate Bus Lines (Edms) Bpk (IBL). Within years the fleet grew to 260 buses that transported 22 000 people. The company employed 900 people. Infrastructure and training facilities were created to support and maintain the bus service. In 1989 the Mass Democratic Movement and other external parliamentary groups implemented actions against the government of the day. IBL was seen as an instrument of the state. If the bus service were interrupted, the economy of Bloemfontein would be seriously impacted. Boycotts and strikes were the order of the day. Buses were burnt, roads were destroyed and there were employee strikes. This situation lasted until April 1996. Employers seldom arrived on time for work, if they arrived at all. During this time employers in Bloemfontein did not want to employ people from Thaba Nchu and Botshabelo due to the unreliability of the workforce. This resulted in job losses that in turn resulted in the relocation of people to informal settlements. The impact on the IBL was that the company had to restructure and reduced to 160 buses and 500 employees.

136

Chapter 7: Engagement – The critical pre-requisite for co-determination

Reflecting on this period, Abel Erasmus states during an interview to inform this chapter in May 2015: “employees were emotional and political and the union influence was significant. I had to look at productivity and systems. It was then that I realised that we, as management, were not aligned with the rest of the organisation. I then had a meeting with my team and we realised that there was a 50% compliance with procedures. We were not doing everything right.” The company, and especially trust, had to be rebuilt. Erasmus realised that team building would be a continuous process in which each person in the company had to participate. He stated during the interview: “this worked well for us and put the company back on track, we had a good system, started checking on productivity, started focusing on black empowerment and many black managers started on the leadership programme.” Change consultants were appointed and formal leadership development courses were contracted with the University of the Free State.

Organisational change and development interventions In 1994–1995 Wayne Kruger was used as change consultant to assist in organisational development initiatives. Later Leon Lategan from Tsumkwe Consultancy and Rica Viljoen from Mandala Consulting facilitated the strategy sessions, team-building and leadership development initiatives. Today, Viljoen is still involved in the facilitation of strategy of IBL.

Engagement Studies in Interstate Bus Lines In 1998, after a national strike, the CEO at that stage, Abel Erasmus, together with the HR executive Henk van Zyl, decided to conduct an engagement study to describe the culture of the organisation and to determine where in the system one could intervene to enhance individual, group and organisational dynamics. Figure 7.1 shows the results of the initial engagement study.

137

138

Figure 7.1: Interstate Bus Lines organisational BeQ results

Evident Enablers

Believe that IBL will survive

Associate with IBL in the community

Individual commitment

Outcome Compromisers

High fatigue and unsupported

Isolated and alone

Don’t feel cared for

Language issues and diversity of thought conflicts

Supervisors inconsistent

Tolerance of Underperformance

Inconsistent Performance Management Does not feel part of a bigger collective

Manifested Dynamic

Tired, overstretched and disengaged

Low levels of trust

Miscommunication And interdepartmental splits

STORY OF IBL – 1999: a disillusioned company

Employee engagement in a South African context

Chapter 7: Engagement – The critical pre-requisite for co-determination

In figure 7.1 it can be seen that although there are areas of strength (the evident enablers in the BeQ model), the outcome compromisers in the middle were so severe that the energy in the system can be described as disillusioned, tired, overstretched and disengaged. The BeQ theory suggests that there was not enough human energy in the system to deal with the task at hand, and without intervention the situation would decline and business indicators such as productivity, turnover and absenteeism would be impacted negatively. From the BeQ study it became clear that levels of trust were depleted. Top management did not speak to middle management and vice versa. Middle management felt totally overwhelmed and alone. The management of performance posed a difficulty, as inconsistency lead to favouritism and local societal dynamics created organisational dynamics. One example was that younger supervisors struggled to lead older workers. Bus drivers were very sceptical about management and felt disrespected and that they were not treated with dignity. They did not feel that supervisors had their goodwill at heart and furthermore did not trust top management. Diversity dynamics were not seen as racial, but instead were negatively impacted by diversity of thought. This finding proved that the leadership of IBL was doing something right – taking into account that this study was done a few years after the new South Africa was established63 and most organisations were still struggling with diversity. Different departments blamed each other for loss of ticket sales, breakdowns and late arrivals of buses. Discipline seemed to create even more trust issues. Inspectors had to make sure that bus drivers actually sold tickets, and felt victimised. A big split was reported between the bus drivers and the workshop. Bus drivers felt that the mechanics did not fix repairs the first time around. The technical department felt that bus drivers drove inconsistently and drove vehicles when they should have been taken to the workshop. High levels of suspicion were experienced by different organisational levels. The culture was seen to be created by the owner, who acted as CEO. Top management were afraid to differ from the CEO and personality-type differences created splits in the EXCO team. Overall, human energy in the system was not enough to maintain the status quo. The engagement study showed clearly that without intervention, things would deteriorate significantly.

Inclusive engagement strategy Towards the end of 1998 a psycho-analytical teambuilding session was facilitated at Mount Everest, outside Harrismith in the Free State. The team engaged in high-rope facilities with the intention of enhancing levels of trust in the system. It was a difficult session and clearly showed the split between Erasmus and the rest of the team. Eventually this split resulted in Erasmus, the founder owner, selling his shares and leaving the company.

139

Employee engagement in a South African context

This session was followed by a strategic planning session early in 1999. During this event, strategy was co-created in alignment with strategy map principles as described by Kaplan and Norton.64 Together with the results of the engagement study, this strategy map was implemented throughout the organisation. Joint action planning took place. On every level in the organisation questions were asked about what that level could do to enhance the levels of engagement and to improve the trust relationships in the organisation. Initially, the organisational transformational process was viewed with scepticism. In particular, the middle management team felt that more work was being dumped on them and that top management would not support the transformational journey. The strategic planning session became an annual event, and every year the strategy of IBL is translated through the whole organisation. The middle management team engaged in a team-building activity that was facilitated at the Oewer, just outside Bloemfontein. Personality type65 was used to describe diversity of thought initiatives. Bar-On emotional intelligence i-tests were conducted as a pre-measure and diagnostic tool to identify individual development plans, and the intervention focused on these identified development areas. Middle management indicated that they felt disillusioned with the strategy of top management. They did not believe that top management was serious about fixing the relationship and reported that they did not feel supported. Ultimately, they did not trust top management to support organisational transformational initiatives. It became clear that the first split in the system to address was the gap between the top management team and the middle management team. A systems thinking process based on the theory of Ackoff66 was facilitated with top and middle management. All the role-players, together with key role-players of the unions, met at Wintershoek Wild for a two-and-a-half-day large group event. During the event systemic causal diagrams were created and shared understanding of the current reality dawned on the group. Without the group knowing it, middle management and top management co-created visuals on the current reality and together came to the realisation that without trust between different levels in the organisation and different departments, the vision of IBL would never be achieved. The team drove the 180 km to Bloemfontein in IBL buses and felt united in the shared vision for the future. Over the next four years an intensive emotional intelligence development plan was executed. Every bus driver was exposed to a journey of soft-skill development over this period. This included communication skills, stress management, presentation skills, personality-type analysis and conflict management skills. The soft skills wheel (figure 7.2) developed by the University of Nebraska was used to identify areas that must be developed.

140

Chapter 7: Engagement – The critical pre-requisite for co-determination

Figure 7.2: Soft skills wheel (University of Nebraska)67 Furthermore, natural teams engaged in team development workshops at Wintershoek Wild, where personality types in teams were presented during an experiential session. High-rope and low-rope activities were used to display group dynamics that manifested in the team. Rogerian facilitation68 was used to work with the group dynamics. Every team identified team norms and a symbol that represented their vision. Action plans on how to enhance engagement on their level in the organisation were drawn up. These plans were linked to strategy, which was then linked to performance management. Four years later the Bar-On EQi was used as a re-measure and an average increase in emotional leadership of top and middle management was 12 and 14 points respectively.i

Internal HR Initiatives At the same time the HR department implemented an in-house training facility with simulators to accredit bus drivers with relevant technical skills. Henk van Zyl, the head of HR, implemented an integrated performance management system after an in-depth i

The Bar-On EQi measures how an individual copes with environmental demands. A mean of 100 means that an individual copes as he or she should for his or her age. The average of the top management of IBL increased from 102 to 114. The average of middle management increased from 94 to 108 after interventions.

141

Employee engagement in a South African context

workplace study was conducted. All processes in the organisation were mapped and job descriptions were finalised. The alignment of the performance management system with organisational strategy was one of the reasons why this system was so successful. Everyone in the organisation knew exactly how they contributed to the organisational success. Another reason for the perceived success was that any intervention was linked to the engagement study. The performance management system was positioned as a way to ensure that favouritism was minimised – the organisation asked for it. Today, 15 years later, this system is still used. Everyone knows exactly what is expected of them and how they will be assessed for performance. The remuneration strategy is aligned with the strategy and the performance management system is used to inform the allocation of bonuses and incentives. A new management team After Erasmus sold his shares in the organisation a new CEO, Tienie Kriel, was appointed in 2006. Later, in 2012 Kriel retired and George Mokgothu was appointed as CEO; Christo du Plessis became the Chief Operating Officer (COO). Henk van Zyl continued to be the head of HR. The other role-players stayed the same. Figure 7.3 shows the EXCO team.

Figure 7.3: The EXCO team of IBL. From left to right: Francois van Wyk, Solly Mitchell, George Mokgothu (CEO, Annalise van der Zwaard, Christo du Plessis and Henk van Zyl.

142

Chapter 7: Engagement – The critical pre-requisite for co-determination

Under the leadership of the new team, renewed energy was spent on the strategic positioning of the organisation and the licence to operate. This was done with a deep understanding of the number of people who are directly and indirectly dependent on the success of the organisation. Today the company is still known for its contribution to social responsibility initiatives and the development of its people.

Increase in engagement In 2009 a BeQ study was conducted to measure the levels of human energy in the system that manifested in engagement. The system measured ENGAGED. It indicated that there was enough positive human energy in the system to implement organisational strategy. There were still areas that could improve and the management team immediately strategised to enhance those areas, which are indicated in figure 7.4. It should however be noted that the levels of engagement that were measured in this organisation are seldom detected. It became clear that employees trust the management, that they are included in business decision-making and that they take personal responsibility and act as if IBL was their own company. Supervisory skills were identified as a development area and addressed in the months that followed. Figure 7.4 shows the BeQ story of IBL of 2009. If one compares this figure with figure 7.1 that shows the BeQ story of IBL in 1999, evidence of the success of leadership and their strategies to enhance engagement is clear. In the previous chapter spiral dynamics and the applied version, human niches, as described by Laubscher69 were discussed. This refers to different thinking systems that inform diversity of thought in systems. The BeQ has a scale that describes these thinking systems. In IBL, the BeQ indicated that 89% of the people in the organisation had a Purple thinking system, with 3% Red, 5% Blue, 2% Orange and 1% Green and Yellow combined. For the organisation to be successful and execute Blue strategies such as the following of standard operating procedures, safety first and being on time without breakdowns, the hearts and minds of Purple people had to be convinced to do Blue.

143

144

Figure 7.4: Interstate Bus Lines Organisational BeQ results

Evident Enablers

Act as owners / High sense of belonging

Proud of IBL

High willingness to take responsibility

Included in\ decision-making

High commitment, will Go the extra mile, Find work challenging

Outcome Compromisers

High workload High fatigue

Acknowledgement Can improve

Low care for wellbeing

Language issues

Supervisors not sharing information

Tolerance of Underperformance

Inconsistent Performance Management

Lowered levels of engagement

Not rewarding the tight things

Innovation and contributions become suppressed

High level of energy and willingness to contribute

Manifested Dynamic

STORY OF IBL – 2009:Nan engaged company

Employee engagement in a South African context

Chapter 7: Engagement – The critical pre-requisite for co-determination

The 2016 strategic plan In 2011 a strategy map was co-created by the top management team and members of the board at a venue at the Gariep Dam. A five-year strategy was designed aligned with the strategy map. Scenario-planning was done, a SOARii analysis as described by Cooperrider70 followed and the different human niches in the system were identified. The strategy map was translated into strategic plans that included strategic goals and strategic initiatives. The strategic goals were translated to operational goals and operational initiatives. Action plans and key deliverables were identified and linked to performance management. The time frame of de-accession for this strategy was five years. Viljoen71 explains that in an organisation that is engaged, there is enough human energy in the system to implement the activities identified during strategic planning sessions and there is visible progress on plans. This was indeed the case with IBL. If strategic maps over the years are compared, what the top management team planned for was actually implemented. Again this strategy was translated and every employee of IBL participated in a facilitated session that focused on strategy translation and team building. The BeQ as described by Viljoen72 was used as underlying theory. After this session the words “Ya Rona” were added to the logo. “Ya Rona” means “ours”. The success of the company is thus a result of the combined efforts of all the employees, and the loyal passengers, for the benefit of the community with the support of the Department of Transport that is viewed as their employer. It further implies that if everyone takes care of “our” company the success of the company will be the success of all. From a human niche perspective, this slogan and the accompanying mascot Bra’ Ronny (figure 7.6) are congruent with the thinking structures of Purple employees. Laubscher and Viljoen73 explain that Purple people want to belong and that they want to form part of a community. They are relational and have pride in what they do. It is a collective thinking system and the community takes care of the children.

ii

A SOAR analysis is a strategic diagnostic tool that explores Strengths, Opportunities, Aspirations and Results and is an Appreciative Enquiry replacement for a SWOT analysis.

145

Employee engagement in a South African context

Figure 7.6: Bra’ Ronny – the IBL Mascot

In 2012 and 2013 all normal teams of bus drivers participated in a strategy translation session and team-building. In 2014 Dr Loraine Laubscher facilitated human niche sessions with various IBL groups. Dr Oubaas Jooste started with the facilitation of emotional intelligence development with all the employees at the beginning of 2015, and so the developmental journey continues. The Dispute Resolution Commissioner of the CCMA, Mr Roye Els, assisted IBL with various facilitation sessions pertaining to relationship building, strike interventions and resolving of disputes. He also introduced them to the principles of the Swedish co-determination model, which prompted the IBL-leaders to investigate alternative labour relation models which ultimately led to the development and implementation of a co-determination agreement, discussed below, between IBL and three different unions.  

Empowerment in Interstate Bus Lines In 2009 the company empowered its employees by allocating four subcontractor buses that the employees manage. The services that Basebetsi Transport renders on behalf of IBL are in line with the tender standards. IBL continues to be actively involved in various community projects such as the Kopanong Day Care Centre, the Cheetah Kidz Sport development initiative, the Saturday Winter School for Matrics, the Tshepisong pre-school and the Monyetla Vista Saturday School project. Interstate Bus Lines and co-determination Over the years, the relationship with the unions was viewed as a critical part of the relational side of the company. In 2002 a social partners relationship-building exercise was conducted and an event was facilitated at the Aventura Resort in Bloemfontein 146

Chapter 7: Engagement – The critical pre-requisite for co-determination

to build mutual trust, enhance communication and respect and deal with unresolved issues. A behavioural contract was negotiated. In 2007 Mandala Consulting facilitated a session between the various unions at which management, national union representatives, union representatives and shop stewards were present. It took place at the Thaba Nchu Sun hotel. Issues that upset group members, untrustworthiness, lack of respect and stubbornness, were discussed. Strategy was co-created and themes were identified to influence the way forward. These included shared understanding of strategy, a re-look at the disciplinary process, a focus on relationship credibility and actively working on the relationship between organised labour and management. Van Zyl concluded the session with the image of an oak tree as symbol of the agreements that were reached. He explained: “the oak that resists the wind, loses its branches one by one, and with nothing left to protect it, the trunk finally snaps. The oak that bends lives longer, its trunk growing wider, its roots deeper and more tenacious.” With this metaphor the intent of management was made visible. In 2014, Van Zyl introduced a co-determination process in IBL. During a two-day inclusive session facilitated by Mandala Consulting at a venue close to the Bloemfontein Zoo, all the top management, the shop stewards, the national representatives of the three acknowledged unions and HR practitioners co-created the progressive co-determination strategy. This strategy would influence the way in which the organisation functioned sustainably. Paradoxically, top management gave away power to get more power. Different workplace forums were formed. These included: •

•

•

a joint management union forum where strategic issues, company performance, engagement, substantive matters, restructuring, collective agreements and amendments of company policies are discussed every three months a Workplace Representative Council where both management and shop stewards meet monthly to discuss and resolve all operational matters that affect both the company and the employees Dispute Resolution and Disciplinary Committees where both management and shop stewards meet to encourage compliance with disciplinary and dispute resolution procedures, to resolve conflicts through non-adversarial means and to assist in speedily resolving formal and informal disputes

Furthermore, decision-making powers were allocated for the forums, the composition of membership was finalised, the term of office was set at two years, the emphasis on training was stressed, and a deadlock and dispute process was compiled. The rights of the unions and of the management were agreed upon and a working plan was codesigned. This plan has been implemented and is functioning today.

147

Employee engagement in a South African context

The years of working on trustiii in the organisation paid off. Suddenly, the union is taking up a different role in the organisation as workers trust management. No longer is the agenda of the union salaries and discipline – on the contrary, the union forms part of the disciplinary and dispute resolution process, and also participates in the joint management union forum where collective agreements are discussed. They (the unions) are not only informed, but all three unions get the same information consistently at the same time. The conversation has shifted away from “us/them” to “we are in this together”. Summary of the interventions Figure 7.7 presents a high-level overview of all the OCD and engagement initiatives. Benchmark of engagement (1998) Joint action planning throughout organisations Psychometrics of top management team and middle management Psycho-analytical teambuilding with EXCO Inclusive engagement strategy

Strategic planning session (early 1999) Middle management teaming session Systems thinking process with EXCO and middle management Intensive soft skills development – all employees (2000-2004) Teaming and joint action planning - all natural teams (2002-2006) Emotional intelligence re-measure Human resource strategies and aligned practices Strategic planning sessions (every 4 years) Translation of strategy to everyone in the organisation Benchmark of engagement (2009) Joint action planning throughout organisation Spiral dynamics sessions with management, supervisors and union (2012) Sessions with the unions and management every 4 years Teambuilding and strategy translation – all natural teams (2014) Emotional intelligence development – all employees (2015) Co-determination strategy with management, unions, national leaders (2015)

Figure 7.7 Overview of OCD interventions at IBL iii See chapter 5 where the concept of trust and the measurement thereof are discussed.

148

Chapter 7: Engagement – The critical pre-requisite for co-determination

Figure 7.6 is evidence of the continued effort on engagement, organisational doing (strategy) and organisational being (the human side).

Where IBL is today In an interview with Abel Erasmus on the 40-year anniversary of IBL, he stated that he believed that IBL today has the right management. He reflected on his journey with the organisation and asked himself very difficult questions – such as whether he had been a good leader. On reflection, he stated that the unions knew where they stood with him. He underlined the importance of knowing the people and their culture and prompted business leaders to build trust between them and their workers/employees, in order to construct a sustainable organisation. In the IBL Newsletter of August 2014, the new CEO, George Mokgothu, thanked the unionised employees for giving their union leaders and representatives a realistic mandate to settle the annual wage negotiations. Not only was there evidence of a mutually satisfying trust relationship between management and the unions, but also such a relationship between management and the employees and management and different role-players in industry. George continued in the IBL Newsletter: “IBL have indeed a wonderful team of passionate and enthusiastic Interstaters who understand that, like charity that begins at home, we have to actively project the company slogan of ‘Together We Progress’ by holding hands and ensuring that each challenge that are faced are taken on in that spirit of togetherness.” Insights gained on co-determination The case study of IBL shows clearly that if there is human energy in the system to perform, progressive strategies such as co-determination can be implemented. Van Zyl identifies the following as meta-insights gained after the successful implementation of the co-determination strategy in IBL during an interview in July 2015: • • • • •

•

Engagement and inclusivity are critical. Participation in strategy translation is crucial. Leadership should walk the talk. Leadership should clearly understand the human niches in the system and translate everything accordingly. Investing in scientific developed psychometrics, OCD intervention and engagement strategies is non-negotiable in creating a conducive culture that has the maturity to deal with co-determination and the implications thereof. The return on investment in soft-skill development and engagement has a direct impact on the bottom line and is clearly demonstrated in increase in production and cost savings and strike prevention.

149

Employee engagement in a South African context

Van Zyl can be described as a Yellow leader. This thinking system has the capacity to see the beauty of Beige, Purple, Red, Blue, Orange and Green and weave them together in an integral manner.74 This capacity may have been the facilitating factor that bound management and workers together in IBL.

CONCLUSION In this chapter the concept of co-determination was discussed. The case of IBL was presented. Not only did leadership in this organisation over the years invest in engagement studies and OCD initiatives such as strategy translation and team building; they also implemented co-determination successfully. The high levels of trust in the system allowed for leadership to give away decision-making powers to worker representatives. This courage was repaid with employees that trusted leadership even more. Other South African organisations can gain valuable insights from this case study on how to enhance the human energy in the system to perform the particular strategy of the organisation.

150

REFERENCES Chapter 1 Albrecht, SL. 2010. Handbook of employee engagement: Perspectives, issues, research and practice. Gloucester, UK: Edward Elgar. Allen, NJ & Meyer, JP. 1990. The measurement and antecedents of affective continuance and normative commitment to the organisation. Journal of Occupation Psychology 63:1–18. Bakker, AB, Albrecht, SL & Leiter, MP. 2011. Key questions regarding work engagement. European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology 20:4–28. Bakker, AB, & Demerouti, E. 2007. The job demands–resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology 22:309–328. Bakker, AB, & Demerouti, E. 2008. Towards a model of work engagement. Career Development International 13:209–233. Bakker, AB, Demerouti, E & Euwema, MC. 2005. Job resources buffer the impact of job demands on burnout. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 10:170–180. Bakker, AB, & Leiter, MP (Eds). 2010. Where to go from here: Integration and future research on work engagement. In AB Bakker & MP Leiter (Eds). Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research. New York, NY: Psychology Press:181–196. Bakker, AB, & Schaufeli, WB. 2008. Positive organisational behaviour: Engaged employees in flourishing organisations. Journal of Organisational Behaviour 29:147–154. Bakker, AB, Schaufeli, WB, Leiter, MP & Taris, TW. 2008. Work engagement: An emerging concept in occupational health psychology. Work & Stress 22:187–200. Bakker, AB, Van Veldhoven, M & Xanthopoulou, D. 2010. Beyond the demand-control model: Thriving on high job demands and resources. Journal of Personnel Psychology 9(1):3–16. Botha, C & Mostert, K. 2014. A structural model of job resources, organisational and individual strengths use and work engagement. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology 40(1):1135–1146. Brand-Labuschagne, L, Mostert, K, Rothmann, S & Rothmann, JC. 2012. Burnout and work engagement of South African blue-collar workers: The development of new scale. Southern African Business Review 16(1):58–93. Chughtai, AA & Buckley, F. 2008. Work engagement and its relationship with state and trait trust: A conceptual analysis. Journal of Behavioural and Applied Management 10(1):47–71. Christian, MS, Garza, AS & Slaughter, JE. 2011. Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology 64:89–136. Coetzee, M & De Villiers, M. 2010. Sources of job stress, work engagement and career orientations of employees in a South African financial institution. South African Business Review 14(1):27–57. Cole, MS, Walter, F, Bedeian, AG & O’Boyle, EH. 2012. Job burnout and employee engagement: A meta-analytic examination of construct proliferation. Journal of Management 38:1550–1581. Crawford, ER, LePine, JA & Rich, BL. 2010. Linking job demands and resources to employee engagement and burnout. A theoretical extension and meta-analytic test. Journal of Applied Psychology 95(5):834–848.

151

Employee engagement in a South African context

Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1990. Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: HarperCollins. Demerouti, E & Bakker, AB. 2011. The job demands-resources model: Challenges for future. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology 37(2):974−983. Demerouti, E, Mostert, K & Bakker, AB. 2010. Burnout and work engagement: A thorough investigation of the independency of both constructs. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 15:209−222. Gorgievski, MJ & Bakker, AB. 2010. Passion for work: Work engagement versus workaholism. In SL Albrecht (Ed.) Handbook of employee engagement: Perspectives, issues, research and practice. Gloucester, UK: Edward Elgar:264−271. Hakanen, JJ, Schaufeli, WB & Ahola, K. 2008. The job demands–resources model: A three-year cross-lagged study of burnout, depression, commitment, and work engagement. Work & Stress 22:224–241. Halbesleben, RB & Wheeler, AR. 2008. The relative roles of engagement and embeddedness in predicting job performance and intention to leave. Work & Stress 22(3):242–256. Halbesbelen, RB. 2011. The consequences of engagement: The good, the bad, and the ugly. European Journal of Work & Organisational Psychology 20(1):68–73. Harter, JK, Schmidt, FL & Hayes, TL. 2002. Business-unit level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology 87:268–279. Hobfoll, SE. 2002. Social and psychological resources and adaptation. Review of General Psychology 6:307–324. Jeung, CW. 2011. The concept of employee engagement: A comprehensive review from a positive organisational behaviour perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly 24(2):49–69. Kahn, WA. 1990. Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal 33:92–724. Luthans, F, Youssef, CM & Avolio, BJ. 2007. Psychological capital: Developing the human competitive edge. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Luthans, F & Youssef, CM. 2007. Emerging positive organisational behaviour. Journal of Management Development 33:321–349. Macey, WH & Schneider, B. 2008. The meaning of employee engagement. Society for Industrial and Organisational Psychology 1:3–30. Mäkikangas, A, Kinnunen, U, Rantanen, J, Mauno, S, Tolvanen, A & Bakker, AB. 2014. Association between vigour and exhaustion during the workweek: A person-centered approach to daily assessments. Anxiety, Stress & Coping: An International Journal 27(5):555−575. Mäkikangas, A, Feldt, T, Kinnunen, U & Mauno, S. 2013. Does personality matter? Research on individual differences in occupational wellbeing. In A Bakker (Ed.) Advances in Positive Organisational Psychology. Bingley: Emerald Group:107–143 . Maslach, C & Leiter, MP. 1997. The truth about burnout. San Francisco, CA: Wiley. Maslach, C, Schaufeli, WB & Leiter, MP. 2001. Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology 52:397–422. May, DR, Gilson, RL & Harter, LM. 2004. The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology 77:11–37.

152

References

Moshoeu, AN & Geldenhuys, DJ. 2015. Job insecurity, organisational commitment and work engagement among staff in an open distance learning institution. Southern African Business Review 19(1):22–43. Nienaber, H & Martins, N. 2014. An employee engagement instrument and framework building on existing research. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 5(20):485–496. Olivier, AL & Rothmann, S. 2007. Antecedents of work engagement in a multinational oil company. South Africa Journal of Industrial Psychology 33(3):49–56. Ouweneel, E, LeBlanc, PM & Schaufeli, WB. 2012. Don’t leave your heart at home: Gain cycles of positive emotions, resources and engagement at work. Career Development International 17(6):537–556. Roberts, DR & Davenport, TO. 2002. Job engagement: Why it’s important and how to improve it. Employment Relations Today 29(3):21–29. Rothmann, S & Joubert, JHM. 2007. Job demands, job resources, burnout and work engagement of management staff at a platinum mine in the North West Province. South African Journal of Business Management 38(3):49–61. Rothmann, S & Rothmann Jr., S. 2010. Factors associated with employee engagement in South Africa. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology 36(2):925–937. Rothmann, S & Welsh, C. 2013. Employee engagement in Namibia: The role of psychological conditions. Management Dynamics 20(1): 14–25. Rich, BL, LePine, JA & Crawford, ER. 2010. Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal 53:617–635. Saks, AM. 2006. Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology 21:600–619. Salami, SO. 2008. Demographic and psychological factors predicting organisational commitment among industrial workers. Anthropologist 10(1):31–38. Salanova, M, Schaufeli, WB, Xanthopoulou, D & Bakker, AB. 2010. The gain spiral of resources and work engagement: Sustaining a positive work life. In AB Bakker & MP Leiter (Eds). Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research. New York, NY: Psychology Press:118–131. Schaufeli, WB & Bakker, AB. 2004. Job demands, job resources and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organisational Behaviour 25:293–315. Schaufeli, WB & Bakker, AB. 2010. Defining and measuring work engagement: Bringing clarity to the concept. In AB Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Eds). Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research. New York, NY: Psychology Press:10–24. Schaufeli, WB & Salanova, M. 2008. Enhancing work engagement through the management of HRs. In K Naswall, J Hellgren & M Sverke (Eds). The individual in the changing working life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press:380–402. Schaufeli, WB & Salanova, M. 2011. Work engagement: On how to better catch a slippery concept. European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology 20(1):39–46. Schaufeli, WB, Salanova, M, González-Romá, V & Bakker, AB. 2002. The measurement of engagement and burnout and: A confirmative analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies 3:71–92.

153

Employee engagement in a South African context

Schaufeli, WB, Bakker, AB & Van Rhenen, W. 2009. How changes in job demands and resources predict burnout, work engagement, and sickness absenteeism. Journal of Organisational Behaviour 30:893–917. Schaufeli, WB. 2013. What is engagement? In C Truss, K Alfes, R Delbridge, A Shantz & E Soane (Eds). Employee engagement in theory and practice. London: Routledge. Seligman, MEP & Csikszentmihalyi, M. 2000. Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist 55:5–14. Shuck, B. 2011. Four emerging perspectives of employee engagement: An integrative literature review. HR Development Review 10:304–328. Shuck, B & Reio, T. 2011. The employee engagement landscape and HRD: How do we link theory and scholarship to current practice? Advance in Developing Human Resources 13:419–428. Shuck, B, Reio, T & Rocco, T. 2011. Employee engagement: An antecedent and outcome approach to model development. HR Development International 14:427–445. Shuck, B & Wollard, K. 2010. Employee engagement & HRD: A seminal review of the foundations. HR Development Review 9(1):89–110. Simpson, M. 2009. Engagement at work: A review of the literature. International Journal of Nursing Studies 46:1012–1024. Stander, MW & Rothmann, S. 2010. Psychological empowerment, job insecurity and work engagement. South African Journal of Industrial and Psychology 36(1):45–53. Van den Broeck, A, Van Ruysseveldt, J, Vanbelle, E & De Witte, H. 2013. The job demands-resources model: Overview and suggestions for future research. Advances in Positive Organisational Psychology 1:83–105. Van Zyl, LE, Deacon, E & Rothmann, S. 2010. Towards happiness: Experiences of work-role fit, meaningfulness and work engagement of industrial and organisational psychologists in South Africa. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology 36(1):890–900. Xanthopoulou, D, Bakker, AB, Demerouti, E & Schaufeli, WB. 2007. The role of personal resources in the job demands-resources model. International Journal of Stress Management 14:121–141. Xanthopoulou, D, Bakker, AB, Demerouti, E & Schaufeli, WB. 2009. Reciprocal relationship between job resources, personal resources and work engagement. Journal of Vocational Behaviour 74:235–244. Zigarmi, D, Nimon, K, Wouson, D, Witt, D & Diehl, J. 2009. Beyond engagement: Toward a framework and operational definition for employee work passion. HR Development Review 8:300–326.

Chapter 2 Aguinis, H. 2013. Performance management. 3rd edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Aguinis, H & Edwards, JR. 2014. Methodological wishes for the next decade and how to make wishes come true. Journal of Management Studies 51:143–174. Alexander, LD. 1985. Successfully implementing strategic decisions. Long Range Planning 18(3):91–97.

154

References

Andrews, KR. 1987. The concept of corporate strategy. 3rd edition. Homewood, IL: Richard D Irwin. Ansoff, HI. 1965. Corporate strategy: An analytical approach to business policy for growth and expansion. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Ansoff, HI. 1988. The new concept of corporate strategy. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Ansoff, HI & McDonnell, E. 1990. Implanting strategic management. New York, NY: Prentice Hall International. Attridge, M. 2009. Measuring and managing employee work engagement: A review of the research and business literature. Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health 24(4):383–398. Bakker, A, Albrecht, S & Leiter, M. 2011. Key questions regarding work engagement. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 20:4–28. Barney, J. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management 17(1):99–120. Bartlett, CA & Ghoshal, S. 2002. Building competitive advantage with people. MIT Sloan Management Review Winter:34–41. Becker, GS. 1962. Investment in human capital: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Political Economy 70(5) Part 2:9–49. Beechler, S & Woodward, IC. 2009. The global war for talent. Journal of International Management 15:273–285. Beehr, TA & Newman, JE. 1978. Job stress, employee health, and organizational effectiveness: A facet analysis, model, and literature review. Personnel Psychology 31:665–699. Beer, M & Eisenstat, R. 2000. The silent killers of strategy implementation and learning. Sloan Management Review 41(4):29–40. Blau, PM. 1964. Exchange and power in social life. New York, NY: Wiley. Brough, P, Dollard, MF & Tuckey, MR. 2014. Theory and methods to prevent and manage occupational stress: Innovations from around the globe. International Journal of Stress Management 21(1):1–6. Buahene, AK & Kovary, G. 2007. Loyalty unplugged: How to get, keep & grow all four generations. Toronto: Canada. Xlibris Corporation. Campbell, BA, Coff, R & Kryscynski, D. 2012. Rethinking sustained competitive advantage from human capital. Academy of Management Review 37(3):376–395. Carr, SC, Inkson, K & Thorn, K. 2005. From global careers to talent flow: Reinterpreting the brain drain. Journal of World Business 40:386–398. Chartered Institute of Personnel Development. 2013. Megatrends. The trends shaping work and working lives: Are organisations losing the trust of their workers? London: Charted Institute of Personnel Development. Chartered Institute of Personnel Development. 2014a. Employee Outlook: Focus on managers. London: Charted Institute of Personnel Development. Chartered Institute of Personnel Development. 2014 b. Developing managers to manage sustainable employee engagement, health and wellbeing. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel Management Development. Cocks, G. 2010. Emerging concepts for implementing strategy. TQM Journal 22(3) 60–266.

155

Employee engagement in a South African context

David, FR. 2013. Strategic management: A competitive advantage approach, concepts and cases. 14th edition. Essex: Pearson Education. Dyer, K. 2009. Taking employee engagement to new heights. SCM 13(4: 1. Drucker, P. 1954. The practice of management. London: Heinemann. Fearon, C, McLaughlin, H & Morris, L. 2013. Conceptualising work engagement: An individual, collective and organisational efficacy perspective. European Journal of Training and Development 37(3):244–256. Farndale, E, Scullion, H & Sparrow, P. 2010. The role of corporate HR function in global talent management. Journal of World Business 45:161–168. Goldman, G, Nienaber, H & Pretorius, M. 2015. The essence of the contemporary business organisation: A critical reflection. Special Issue of Global Business and Technology Journal (forthcoming). Greenwald, HP. 2008. Organizations: Management without control. Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage. Griseri, P. 2013. An introduction to the philosophy of management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Guest, D. 2014. Employee engagement: A sceptical analysis. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance 1(2):141–156. Halogen. 2015. Developing tomorrow’s leaders: Why the spotlight is on middle managers. People Management August:18. Harter, JK, Schmidt, FL & Hayes, TL. 2002. Business-level-unit relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2:268–279. Holtom, BC. Mitchell, TR. Lee, TW. & Eberly, MB. 2008. Turnover and retention research: a Glance at the past, a closer review of the present and a venture into the future. Academy of Management Annals 2(1):231–274. [Online]. Available: http://ww.informaworld.com.Oasis. unisa.ac.za/smpp/section?content=a7949 [Accessed 7 April 2011]. Huselid, MA. 1995. The impact of HR management practices on turnover, productivity and corporate financial performance. Academy of Management Journal 383:635–872. Jarzabkowski, P & Spee, AP. 2009. Strategy-as-practice: A review and future directions for the field. International Journal of Management Review 111:69–95. Kayastha, R, Murthy, VK & Adhikary, PR. 2013. Identifying occupational stress among executive officers in governmental and non-governmental organisations of Nepal. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education 2:135–142. Klassen, RM, Aldhafri, S, Mansfield, CF, Purwanto, E, Siu, AFY, Wong, MW & Woods-McConney, A. 2012. Teachers’ engagement at work: An international validation study. Journal of Experimental Education 804: 317–337. Lewis, R. 2011. Management competencies for enhancing employee engagement. Research Insights. London: Charted Institute of Personnel Development. Lockwood, N. 2007. Leveraging employee engagement for competitive advantage: HR’s strategic role. Society for HR Management Research, Quarterly 31:1–11. Macey, WH & Schneider, B. 2008. The meaning of engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology 1:3–30.

156

References

Mankins, MC & Steele, R. 2005. Turning great strategy into great performance. Harvard Business Review July–August:65–72. Martins, N & Nienaber, H. 2014. SABPP Fact Sheet Number 2014/:Employee Engagement. Johannesburg: SABPP:11. May, DR, Gilson, RL & Harter, LM. 2004. The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology 77:11–37. Mintzberg, H. 1994. The rise and fall of strategic planning. Norfolk: FT Prentice Hall. Moss, M. 2014. Generational subcultures. Unpublished MCom dissertation. Pretoria: Unisa. Nag, R, Hambrick, DC, & Chen, M-J. 2007. What is strategic management really? Inductive derivation of a consensus definition of the field. Strategic Management Journal 28:935– 955. Nienaber, H. 2010. Conceptualisation of management and leadership. Management Decision 485:661–67. Nienaber, H, Cant, MC & Strydom, JW. 2002. An exploratory investigation into the application of market strategies by selected JSE-listed companies in the food sector in the period 1996–1999. Southern African Business Review July, 61:24–30. Nienaber, H & Martins, N. 2015. Validating a scale measuring engagement in a South African context. Journal of Contemporary Management, 12: 401-425. ISBN: 1815-7440. Nilsson, S & Ellström, P-E. 2011. Employability and talent management: Challenges for HRD practices. European Journal of Training and Development 361:26–45. Ordóñez de Pablo, P & Lytras, MD. 2008. Competencies and HR management: implications for organizational competitive advantage. Journal of Knowledge Management 126:48–55. Owen, R. 1813. An address to the superintendants of manufactories. In Merrill, HF (Ed.) 1970. Classics in Management. [S.l.]: American Management Association. Ployhart, RE, Nyberg, AJ, Reilly, G & Maltarich, MA. 2014. Human capital is dead: Long live human capital resources! Journal of management 402:371–398. Porter, M. 1985. Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. New York, NY: Free Press. Porter, M. 1998. Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. 2nd edition. New York, NY: Free Press. Pugh, SD & Dietz, J. 2008. Employee engagement at the organisational level of analysis. Industrial and Organizational Psychology 1:44–47. Richardson, KM & Rothstein, HR. 2008. Effects of occupational stress management intervention programs: A meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 13:69–70. [Online]. Available: https://activityinsight.pace.edu/krichardson/intellcont/Richardson%20JOHP%20 2008-1.pdf [Accessed 8 August 2001]. Robert, MM. 1991. Why CEOs have difficulty in implementing their strategies. Journal of Business Strategy, March/April:58–59. Rothbard, NP. 2001. Enriching or depleting? The dynamics of engagement in work and family roles. Administrative Science Quarterly 46:655–684

157

Employee engagement in a South African context

Saks, AM. 2006. Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology 217:600–619. Sandy, W. 1991. Avoid the breakdowns between planning and implementation. Journal of Business Strategy September/October:30–33. Schaufeli, WB & Salanova, M. 2011. Work engagement: On how to better catch a slippery concept. European Journal of Work and Organization Psychology 201:39–46. Schaufeli, WB, Salanova, M, González-Romá, V & Bakker, AB. 2002. The measurement of engagement and burnout and: A confirmative analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies 3:71–92. Schaap, I. 2012. Strategy implementations — Can organizations attain outstanding performance? Strategic Management Review 61:98–121. Schuler, RS, Jackson, SE & Tarique, I. 2011. Global talent management and global talent challenges: Strategic opportunities for IHRM. Journal of World Business 46:506–516. Shantz, A & Alfes, K. 2015. Work engagement and voluntary absence: The moderating role of job resources. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 244:530–543. Sirmon, DG, Hitt, MA, Ireland, RD & Gilbert, BA. 2011. Resource orchestration to create competitive advantage: Breadth, depth, and life cycle effects. Journal of Management 375: 1390–1412. Tait, A & Nienaber, H. 2010. Exploring the strategy-to-performance gap: The case of four South African life insurers. Journal of Contemporary Management 7:271–289. Van der Merwe, MM & Nienaber, H. 2015. Factors hindering strategy implementation as perceived by top, middle and frontline managers in a South African electronics organisation. Special Issue of JGBAT 11 (2): 45-57. ISSN: 1553-5495. Vaiman, V, Scullion, H & Collings, D. 2012. Talent management decision making. Management Decision 505:925–941. Viljevac, A, Cooper-Thomas, HD & Saks, A. 2012. An investigation into the validity of two measures of work engagement. International Journal of HR Management 2317:3692–3709.

Chapter 3 Ackoff, RL. 1979. The future of operational research is Past. Journal of the Operational Research Society 30(2):93–104. American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language. 2007. [Online]. Available: http://www. bartleby.com/am/ [Accessed 07 March 2015]. American Heritage® Stedman’s Medical Dictionary 2002. Boston & New York: Houghton Mifflin. [Online]. Available: http://www/medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/ [Accessed 03 March 2015]. Beck, D & Cowan, C. 1996, 2006. Spiral Dynamics: Mastering values, leadership and change. New York, NY: Chichester. BeQ Accreditation Manual. 2015. Available at Randburg: Mandala Consulting. Benson, JM. 1999. The true meaning of commitment. Bryant Business online. [Online]. Available: http://bryantbusiness.bryant.edu/summer99/commitmen.shtml [Accessed 26 August 2015].

158

References

Botha, HE & Schutte, PC. 2003. CES Technical manual. Johannesburg: ProHuman Consulting. Booysen, L. 2007. Societal power shifts and changing social identities. South Africa: workplace implications. SAJEMS NS 101:1– 20. Brown, R, Condor, S, Mathews A, Wade G & Williams J. 1986. Explaining intergroup differentiation in an industrial organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology 59:273–286. Creswell, JW & Clark, VLP. 2011: Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 2nd edition. London: Sage. Creswell, JW, Clark, VLP, Gutmann, ML & Hanson, WE. 2003. Advances in mixed methods research designs. In A Tashakkori & C Teddlie (Eds). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 209–240. Collins, R. 2014. A graphical method for exploring the business environment. [Online]. Available: http://Graphical Method for Exploring the Business Environment [Accessed 23 June 2015]. Conference Board of Canada. 2006. Employee engagement: A review of current research and its implications. [Online]. Available: http://sso.conferenceboard.ca/web/Register.aspx [Accessed 07 July 2015]. Cooperrider, D. 1990. Positive image, positive action: The affirmative basis of organizing. In S Srivastva & DL Cooperrider (Eds). Appreciative management and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass:91–125. Corporate Leadership Council 2004. Report on driving performance and retention through employee engagement. [Online]. Available: www: http://209.85.129.104/ search?q=cache:EJLIakjmBYEJ [Accessed 07 July 2015]. Erickson, F. 1987 Conceptions of school culture: An overview. Educational Administration 234:11–24. Estés, CP. 2015. Insights at the edge. Podcast with T Simons and CP Estés. [Online]. Available: htttp://www.soundstrue.com/podcast/transcripts/ clarissapinkola-estes.php? [Accessed 10 July 2015]. Faqua, DR & Newman, JL. 2002. The role of system theory in consulting psychology. In RL Lawman (Ed.) The California School of organizational studies handbook of organizational consulting psychology: a comprehensive guide to theory, skill and techniques. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass:76–105. Heen, S & Linn, E 2015. Thanks for the feedback. Boston: MA. Speck Books. Hennessy J & West, MA. 1999. Intergroup behavour in organizations: A field test of social identity theory. Small Group Research 303:361–382. Heron, S & Reason, P. 2000. The practice of co-operative enquiry. Research with rather than on people. In S Heron and P Reason (Eds). The handbook of action research. London: Sage. Hinkle, S, Taylor, LA & Fox-Cardamone, LF. 1989. Intragroup indentification and intergroupdifferentiation: A multicomponent approach. British Journal of Social Psychology 28:305–317. Hofstede, G. 1991. Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. New York, NY: McGrawHill. Hyter, MC & Turnock, JL. 2005. The power of inclusion: Unlock the potential and productivity of your workforce. Toronto: Canada. John Wiley & Sons.

159

Employee engagement in a South African context

Jöreskog, KG. 1971. Simultaneous factor analysis in several populations. Psychometrika 36:409– 426. Jung, CG. 1973. Psychological reflections: A new anthology of his writings. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Kernerman English Multilingual Directory. 2006. [Online]. Available: http://dictionary.reference. com/help/kdict.html [Accessed 09 May 2015]. Kraft, RJ. & Sakofs, M. (Eds). 1985. The theory of experiential education. Boulder: CO. Association for Experiential Education. Laubscher, LI. 2013. Human niches: Spiral dynamics for Africa. PhD dissertation. Da Vinci Institute, Modderfontein. LeBaron, M. 2005 Bridging cultural conflicts: a new approach for a changing world. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Lombardi, V. n.d. Commitment quotes. Thinkexist.com [Online]. Available: http://www. thinkexist.com/English/Topic/x/Topic_208_1.htm [Accessed 07 June 2015]. Miller, FA & Katz, JH. 2002. The inclusion breakthrough: Unleashing the real power of diversity. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler. Owen, H. 2008. Open space technology: A user’s guide. 3rd edition. Washington, DC: BerrettKoehler. PHCSA. Professional Code and Conduct: PHSCA. [Online]. Available: www.hpcsa.co.za/conduct/ Ethics [Accessed 28 August 2015]. Russel, J. 2004. Personal resilience during change. Unpublished [paper?]. ASTD International Conference & Expo, Washington, DC. May 21 – 28, 2004. Schutte, PC. 2004. Employee satisfaction and customer service: A literature perspective. Johannesburg: IGH. Unpublished. Sparkes, AC. 2002. Telling tales in sport and physical activity: A qualitative journey. Leeds, UK: Human Kinetics. Spindler, G & Spindler, L. 1992. Cultural process and ethnography: An anthropological perspective. The handbook of qualitative research in education. London/New York: Academic Press:53–72. Random House Unabridged Dictionary. 2006. [Online]. Available: http://dictionary.reference. com/browse/vice [Accessed 06 December 2015]. Van Knippenberg, D. 2000. Work motivation and performance: A social identity perspective. Applied Psychology: An International Review 49:357–371. Viljoen RC. 2008. Sustainable organisational transformation. Unpublished DBL Thesis Available at the SBL: Unisa. Midrand: Unisa Viljoen, RC. 2014. Inclusive organizational transformation: An African perspective on human niches and diversity of thought. Farnham, UK: Gower. Viljoen, RC & Laubscher, LI. 2015. African spiritual consciousness at work. In C Piller & R Wolfgramm (Eds). Indigenous spiritualties at work: Transforming the spirit of business enterprise.  Charlotte, NC: Information Age.  Viljoen, RC. Organisational change and development: An African perspective. 2015. Randburg: Knowledge Resources.

160

References

Viljoen, RC & Laubscher, L. 2014. Spiral dynamics. In R Lessem & A Schieffer (Eds). An integral polity. Farnham, UK: Gower. WordNet® 3.0. 2006: Princeton University. [Online]. Available: http://vancouver-webpages.com/ wordnet/ [Accessed 06 December 2015].

Chapter 4 Anstey, M. 2013. Marikana – and the push for a new South African pact. South African Journal of Labour Relations 37(2):133–145. Imandim, L, Bisschoff, C & Botha, C. 2014. A model to measure employee engagement. Problems and Perspectives in Management 12(4):520– 532. Nienaber, H & Martins, N. 2014. An employee engagement instrument and framework building on existing research. MJSS 520:485–496. Nienaber, H & Martins, N. 2015. Validating a scale measuring engagement in a South African context. Journal of Contemporary Management. 12: 401-425. Macey, WH & Schneider, B. 2008. The meaning of engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology 1:3–30. Remenyi, D. 2014. A dictionary of research concepts and issues. Reading, UK: Academic Conferences and Publishing International. SABPP. 2014. Fact Sheet: Employee engagement, 2014/9. Schaufeli, WB & Salanova, M. 2011. Work engagement: On how to better catch a slippery concept. European Journal of Work and Organization Psychology 20(1):39–46.

Chapter 5 Agarwal, UA. 2014. Linking justice, trust and innovative work behaviour to work engagement. Personnel Review 43(1):41–73. doi: 10.1108/PR-02-2012-0019 Ashleigh, MJ, Higgs, M & Dulewicz, V. 2012. A new propensity to trust scale and its relationship with individual wellbeing: Implications for HRM policies and practices. HR Management Journal 22(4):360–376. doi: 10.1111/1748-8583.12007 Atkinson, S & Butcher, D. 2003. Trust in managerial relationships. Journal of Managerial Psychology 18(4):282–304. doi: 10.1108/02683940310473064 Bachmann, R. 2011. At the crossroads: Future directions in trust research. Journal of Trust Research 12:203–213. doi: 10.1080/21515581.2011.603513 Bachmann, R & Inkpen, AC. 2011. Understanding institutional-based trust building processes in inter-organizational relationship. Organization Studies 322:281–301. doi: 10.1177/0170840610397477 Bakker, AB, Albrecht, SL & Leiter, MP. 2011. Work engagement: Further reflections on the state of play. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 20(1):74–88. doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2010.546711 Barrick, MR & Mount, MK. 1991. The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology 44(1):1–26. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688

161

Employee engagement in a South African context

Barrick, MR, Mount, MK & Judge, TA. 2001. Personality and performance at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go next? International Journal of Selection and Assessment 9(1/2):9–30. doi: 10.1111/1468-2389.00160 Becker, WJ, Cropanzano, R & Sanfey, AG. 2011. Organizational neuroscience: Taking organizational theory inside the neural black box. Journal of Management 37(4):933–961. doi: 10.1177/0149206311398955 Benbasat, I, Gefen, D & Pavlou, P. 2010. Introduction to the special issue on novel perspectives on trust in information systems. MIS Quarterly 342:367–371. [Online]. Available: Business Source Complete database. [Accessed 28 September 2010]. Bews, N. 2000. An investigation into the facilitators of the trustworthiness of managers. Unpublished PhD thesis. Johannesburg: Rand Afrikaans University. Bews, N & Rossouw, D. 2002. Contemporary organisational change and the importance of trust. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology 28(4):2–6. doi: 10.4102/sajip.v28i4.72 Blau, PM. 1989. Reciprocity and Imbalance. Current Contents 49:16. [Online]. Available: http:// garfield.library.upenn.edu/classics1989/A1989CA26300001.pdf [Accessed 24 August 2014]. Brower, HH, Lester, SW, Korsgaard MA & Dineen, BR. 2009. A closer look at trust between managers and subordinates: Understanding the effects of both trusting and being trusted on subordinate outcomes. Journal of Management, 35(2):327–347. doi: 10.1177/0149206307312511 Burke, CS, Sims, DE, Lazzara, EH & Salas, E. 2007. Trust in leadership: A multi-level review and integration. Leadership Quarterly 186:606–32. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.09.006 Chan, H, Lam, K & Liu, P. 2011. The structure of trust in China and the U.S. Journal of Business Ethics 100:553–566. doi: 10.1007/s10551-010-0700-1 Cho, YJ. 2006. The mechanism of trust and distrust formation and their relational outcomes. Journal of Retailing 82(1):25–35. doi: 10.1016/j.jretai.2005.11.002 Cho, YJ & Poister, TH. 2014. Managerial practices, trust in leadership, and performance: Case of the Georgia Department of Transportation. Public Personnel Management 43(2):179–196. doi: 10.1177/0091026014523136 Cho, YJ & Ringquist, EJ. 2011. Managerial trustworthiness and organizational outcomes. Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory 21(1):53–86. doi: 10.1093/jopart/muq015 Chughtai, AA & Buckley, F. 2008. Work engagement and its relationship with state and trait trust: A conceptual analysis. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management 10(1):47–71. [Online]. Available: ABI/INFORM Global database. Document ID: 1563915441 [Accessed 1 April 2009]. Clark, MC & Payne, RL. 1997. The nature and structure of workers’ trust in management. Journal of Organizational Behavior 18:205–224. [Online]. Available: InfoTrac Web: General BusinessFile International [Accessed 27 February 2001]. Colquitt, JA, Scott, BA & LePine, JA. 2007. Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A metaanalytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology 92(4):909–927. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.909 Connell, J, Ferres, N & Travaglione, T. 2003. Engendering trust in manager–subordinate relationships: Predictors and outcomes. Personnel Review 32(5):569–587, 541, 672–673. [Online]. Available: ABI/INFORM Global database. Document ID: 941384501 [Accessed 15 May 2009].

162

References

Costa, AC & Anderson, N. 2011. Measuring trust in teams: Development and validation of a multifaceted measure of formative and reflective indicators of team trust. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 20(1):119–154. doi: 10.1080/13594320903272083 Costa, PR & McCrae, RR. 2010. Bridging the gap with the five-factor model. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment 12:127–130. doi: 10.1037/a0020264 Crossley, CD, Cooper, CD & Wernsing, TS. 2013. Making things happen through challenging goals: Leader proactivity, trust, and business-unit performance. Journal of Applied Psychology 98(3):540–549. doi: 10.1037/a0031807 Cunningham, JB & MacGregor, J. 2000. Trust and the design of work: Complementary constructs in satisfaction and performance. Human Relations 53(12):1575–1591. doi: 10.1177/00187267005312003 Currall, SC & Epstein, MJ. 2003. The fragility of organizational trust: Lessons from the rise and fall of Enron. Organizational Dynamics 32(2):193–206. doi: 10.1016/S0090-26160300018-4 Desmet, PT, De Cremer, D & Van Dijk, E. 2011. In money we trust? The use of financial compensations to repair trust in the aftermath of distributive harm. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 114(2):75–86. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.0.006 Dietz, G. 2011. Going back to the source: Why do people trust each other? Journal of Trust Research 12:215–222. doi: 10.1080/21515581.2011.603514 Dietz, G & Den Hartog, DN. 2006. Measuring trust inside organisations. Personnel Review 35(5):557–588. [Online]. Available: ABI/INFORM Global database. Document ID: 1143130841 [Accessed 1 April 2009]. Dietz, G, Gillespie, N & Chao, G. 2010. Unravelling the complexities of trust and culture. In MNK Saunders, D Skinner, G Dietz, N Gillespie & RJ Lewicki (Eds.) Organizational trust: A cultural perspective:3–41. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dimoka, A. 2010. What does the brain tell us about trust and distrust? Evidence from a functional neuroimaging study. MIS Quarterly 34(2):373–A7. [Online]. Available: Business Source Complete database [Accessed 7 July 2010]. Dirks, KT & Ferrin, DL. 2001. The role of trust in organizational settings. Organization Science 12(4):450–467. [Online]. Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3085982 [Accessed 25 April 2013]. Dirks, KT, Kim, PH, Ferrin, DL & Cooper, CD. 2011. Understanding the effects of substantive responses on trust following a transgression. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 114:87–103. doi: 10.1016/jobhdp.2010.10.003 Dirks, KT, Lewicki, RJ & Zaheer, A. 2009. Repairing relationships within and between organizations: Building a conceptual foundation. Academy of Management Review 34(1):68–84. doi: 10.5465/AMR.2009.35713285 Edelman trust barometer. 2014. About trust. [Online]. Available: http://www.edelman.com/ insights/intellectual-property/2014-edelman-trust-barometer/ [Accessed 24 August 2014]. Engelbrecht, AS & Cloete, BE. 2000. An analysis of a supervisor-subordinate trust relationship. Journal of Industrial Psychology 26(1):24–28.

163

Employee engagement in a South African context

Engell, AD, Haxby, JV & Todorov, A. 2007. Implicit trustworthiness decisions: Automatic coding of face properties in the human amygdala. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 19(9):1508–1519. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2007.19.9.1508 Ferrin, DL, Kim, PH, Cooper, CD & Dirks, KT. 2007. Silence speaks volumes: The effectiveness of reticence in comparison to apology and denial for responding to integrity- and competencebased trust violations. Journal of Applied Psychology 92(4):893–908. [Online]. Available: Business Source Complete database [Accessed 24 March 2009]. Fichman, M. 2003. Straining towards trust: Some constraints on studying trust in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior 24:133–157. doi: 10.1002/job.189 Fukuyama, F. 1995. Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. London: Hamish Hamilton. Fulmer, CA & Gelfand, MJ. 2012. At what level and in whom we trust: Trust across multiple

organizational

levels.

Journal

of

Management

38(4):1167–1230.

doi:

10.1177/0149206312439327 Furumo, K, De Pillis, E & Green, D. 2009. Personality influences trust differently in virtual and faceto-face teams. International Journal of HRs Development and Management 9(1):36–58. doi: 10.1504/IJHRDM.2009.021554 Galagan, P. 2009. Trust falls: Despite some harrowing business page headlines, confidence in leadership could still save the day. No actual trust falls are involved. T+D 63(11):26–28. [Online]. Available: https://www.questia.com/magazine/1G1-212767685/trust-falls-despitesome-harrowing-business-page [Accessed 29 January 2010]. Gao, L, Janssen, O & Shi, K. 2011. Leader trust and employee voice: The moderating role of empowering leader behaviors. Leadership 22:787–798. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.05.015 Gargiulo, M & Ertug, G. 2006. The dark side of trust. In R Bachmann and A Zaheer (Eds). Handbook of trust research:165–186. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. George, JM. 2011. The wider context, costs, and benefits of work engagement. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 20(1):53–59. doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2010.509924 Ghani, NAA & Hussin, TABSR. 2009. Antecedents of perceived organizational support. Canadian Social Science 5(6):121–130. [Online] Available: http://cscanada.net/index.php/css/article/ viewFile/j.css.1923669720090506.013/68 [Accessed 29 January 2010]. Gill, J. 1996. Communication – is it really that simple? An analysis of a communication exercise in a case study situation. Personnel Review 25(5):23–36. Gillespie, N & Dietz, G. 2009. Trust repair after an organization-level failure. Academy of Management Review 34(1):127–145. doi: 10.5465/AMR.2009.35713319 Goel, S, Bell, GG & Pierce, JL. 2005. The perils of Pollyanna: Development of the over-trust construct. Journal of Business Ethics 58:203–218. doi: 10.1007/s10551-005-1415-6 Gosling, SD, Rentfrow, PJ & Swann Jr, WB. 2003. A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality 37(6):504–528. doi: 10.1016/S009265660300046-1 Grabner-Kräuter, S & Kaluscha, EA. 2003. Empirical research in on-line trust: A review and critical assessment. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 58:783–812. doi: 10.1016/ S1071-58190300043-0

164

References

Grant, AM & Sumanth, JJ. 2009. Mission possible? The performance of prosocially motivated employees depends on manager trustworthiness. Journal of Applied Psychology 94:927– 944. doi: 10.1037/a0014391 Halbesleben, JR. 2011. The consequences of engagement: The good, the bad, and the ugly.  European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 20(1):68–73. doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2010.514327 Halbesleben, JRB & Wheeler, AR. 2012. To invest or not? The role of co-worker support and trust in daily reciprocal gain spirals of helping behavior. Journal of Management 0149206312455246, Published online before print 14 August 2012, as doi: 10.1177/0149206312455246 Hamm, JA, PytlikZillig, LM, Herian, MN, Bornstein, BH, Tomkins, AJ & Hoffman, l. 2013. Deconstructing public confidence in state courts. Journal of Trust Research 3(1):11–31. doi: 10.1080/21515581.2013.771501 Hassan, A & Ahmed, F. 2011. Authentic leadership, trust and work engagement. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology 80:750–756. Hiller, NJ, DeChurch, LA, Murase, T & Doty, D. 2011. Searching for outcomes of leadership: A 25year review. Journal of Management 37(4):1137–1177. doi: 10.1177/0149206310393520 Holtz, BC. 2013. Trust primacy: A model of the reciprocal relations between trust and perceived justice. Journal of Management. Published online before print on 28 January 2013. doi: 10.1177/0149206312471392 Huang, L & Murnighan, JK. 2010. What’s in a name? Subliminally activating trusting behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 111:62–70. doi: 10.1016/j. obhdp.2009.10.002 Keyton, J & Smith, FL. 2009. Distrust in leaders: Dimensions, patterns, and emotional intensity. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 16(1):6–18. doi: 10.1177/1548051809334196 Kim, PH, Cooper, CD, Dirks, KT & Ferrin, DL. 2013. Repairing trust with individuals vs. groups. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 120(1):1–14. doi: 10.1016/j. obhdp.2012.08.004 Kim, PH, Dirks, KT & Cooper, CD. 2009. The repair of trust: A dynamic bilateral perspective and multilevel conceptualization. Academy of Management Review 34(3):401–422. doi: 10.5465/ AMR.2009.40631887 Korsgaard, MA, Brodt, SE & Whitener, EM. 2002. Trust in the face of conflict: The role of managerial trustworthy behavior and organizational context. Journal of Applied Psychology 87(2):312– 319. [Online] Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11367975_Trust_in_ the_face_of_conflict_The_role_of_managerial_trustworthy_behavior_and_organizational_ context [Accessed 27 March 2009]. Kovač, J & Jesenko, M. 2010. The connection between trust and leadership styles in Slovene organizations. Journal for East European Management Studies 15(1):9–33. [Online] Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/46526791_The_connection_between_trust_ and_leadership_styles_in_Slovene_organizations [Accessed 7 July 2010]. Kramer, RM. 1999. Trust and distrust in organizations: Emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annual Review of Psychology 50(1):569–598. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.569

165

Employee engagement in a South African context

Kramer, RM & Lewicki, RJ. 2010. Repairing and enhancing trust: Approaches to reducing organizational trust deficits. Academy of Management Annals 4:245–277. doi: 10.1080/19416520.2010.487403 Lapidot, Y, Kark, R & Shamir, B. 2007. The impact of situational vulnerability on the development and erosion of followers’ trust in their leader. Leadership Quarterly 18(1):16–34. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.11.004 Lee, N, Senior, C & Butler, MJR. 2012. The domain of organizational cognitive neuroscience: Theoretical and empirical challenges. Journal of Management 38(4):921–931. doi: 10.1177/0149206312439471 Lewicki, RJ & Bunker, BB. 1996. Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships. In RM Kramer & TR Tyler (Eds.) Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research:114–139. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lewicki, RJ, McAllister, DJ & Bies, RJ. 1998. Trust and distrust: new relationships and realities. Academy of Management Review 23(3):438–459. doi: 10.5465/AMR.1998.926620 Lewicki, RJ, Tomlinson, EC & Gillespie, N. 2006. Models of interpersonal trust development: Theoretical approaches, empirical evidence, and future directions. Journal of Management 32:991–1022. doi: 10.1177/0149206306294405. Li, AN & Tan, HH. 2013. What happens when you trust your supervisor? Mediators of individual performance in trust relationships. Journal of Organizational Behavior 34(3):407–425. doi: 10.1002/job.1812 Li, PP. 2008. Toward a geocentric framework of trust: An application to organizational trust. Management and Organization Review 43:413–439. doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8784.2008.00120.x Lin, C-P. 2010. Modeling corporate citizenship, organizational trust, and work engagement based on attachment theory. Journal of Business Ethics 94(3):517–531. Lount, RB. 2010. The impact of positive mood on trust in interpersonal and intergroup interactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 983, 420–33. doi: 10.1037/a0017344 Lount, RB & Pettit, NC. 2012. The social context of trust: The role of status. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 117(1):15–23. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.07.005 Luhmann, N. 1968. Vertrauen: Ein Mechanismus der reduktion sozialer Komplexität. Stuttgart: Ferdinand Enke. Luhmann, N. 1988. Familiarity, confidence, trust: Problems and alternatives. In D Gambetta (Ed.) Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relationships. Oxford: Basil Blackwell:94–107. Luhmann, N. 2000. Familiarity, confidence, trust: Problems and alternatives. In D Gambetta (Ed.) Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations. Department of Sociology, University of Oxford:chapter 6:94–107. [Online]. Available: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/ download? [15 February 2016]. doi: 10.1.1.23.8075 Macey, WH & Schneider, B. 2008. The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and Organisational Psychology 1(1):3–30. doi: 10.1111/j.1754-9434.2007.0002.x Martins, N. 2000. Developing a trust model for assisting management during change. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology 26(3):27–31. doi: 10.4102/sajip.v26i3.716 Martins, N. 2002. A model for managing trust. International Journal of Manpower 23(8):754–769. doi: 10.1108/01437720210453984

166

References

Martins, N & Von der Ohe, H. 2003. Organisational climate measurement – new and emerging constructs during a period of transformation. South African Journal of Labour Relations 27(3):41–59. Persistent link http://hdl.handle.net/10520/EJC59572 Martins, N & Von der Ohe, H. 2005. Trust Relationship Audit [Measurement Instrument]. Glenvista: Organisational Diagnostics. Martins, N & Von der Ohe, H. 2011. A longitudinal study of the role of trust during change. Journal of Psychology in Africa 21(2):301–306. Martins, N, Watkins, M, Von der Ohe, H & De Beer, M. 1997. Trust audit: Summary report. Pretoria: Unisa. Unpublished Report. Mayer, RC & Davis, JH. 1999. The effect of the performance appraisal system on trust for management: A field quasi-experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology 84(1):123–136. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.84.1.123 Mayer, RC, Davis, JH & Schoorman, FD. 1995. An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review 20(3):709–734. doi: 10.5465/AMR.1995.9508080335 Mayer, RC & Gavin, MC. 2005. Trust in management and performance: Who minds the shop while the employees watch the boss? Academy of Management Journal 48(5):874–888. doi: 10.5465/AMJ.2005.18803928 McCrae, RR, Chan, W, Jussim, L, De Fruyt, F, Löckenhoff, CE, De Bolle, M et al. 2013. The inaccuracy of national character stereotypes. Journal of Research in Personality 47(6):831–842. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2013.08.006 McEvily, B, Perrone, V & Zaheer, A. 2003b. Trust as an organizing principle. Organization Science 14(1):91–103. Avialable: ABI/INFORM Global database. Document ID: 293585401 [Accessed 6 April 2009]. McEvily, B & Tortoriello, M. 2011. Measuring trust in organisational research: Review and recommendations. Journal of Trust Research 1(1):23–63. doi: 10.1080/21515581.2011.552424 Mishra, AK. 1996. Organizational responses to crisis – the centrality of trust. In RM Kramer, & TR. Tyler Eds., Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research: 261–287. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Mishra, AK & Mishra, KE. 2013. The research on trust in leadership: The need for context. Journal of Trust Research 31:59–69. doi: 10.1080/21515581.2013.771507 Nguyen, TV & Rose, J. 2009. Building trust—Evidence from Vietnamese entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 242:165–182. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.03.004 Nooteboom, B. 2007. Social capital, institutions and trust. Review of Social Economy 65(1):29–53. doi: 10.1080/00346760601132154 Nooteboom, B, Berger, H & Noorderhaven, NG. 1997. Effects of trust and governance on relational risk. Academy of Management Journal 40(2):308–338. doi: 10.2307/256885 Norman, SM, Avolio, BJ & Luthans, F. 2010. The impact of positivity and transparency on trust in leaders and their perceived effectiveness. Leadership Quarterly 21:350–364. doi: 10.1016/j. leaqua.2010.03.002 Norman, WT. 1963. Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: Replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 66(6):574–583. doi: 10.1037/h0040291.PMID13938947

167

Employee engagement in a South African context

Oh, I, Wang, G & Mount, MK. 2011. Validity of observer ratings of the five-factor model of personality traits: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology 96(4):762–773. doi: 10.1037/a0021832 Paliszkiewicz, JO. 2011. Trust management: Literature review. Management 6(4):315–331. [Online]. Available: http://www.fm-kp.si/zalozba/ISSN/1854-4231/6_315-331.pdf [Accessed 15 July 2014]. Posten, A-C & Mussweiler, T. 2013. June 17. When distrust frees your mind: The stereotypereducing effects of distrust. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/a0033170 Rees, C, Alfes, K & Gatenby, M. 2013. Employee voice and engagement: Connections and consequences. International Journal of HR Management 24(14):2780–2798. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2013.763843 Reiche, BS, Cardona, P, Lee, Y-T, Canela, MÁ, Akinnukawe, E, Briscoe, JP et al. 2014. Why do managers engage in trustworthy behavior? A multilevel cross-cultural study in 18 countries. Personnel Psychology 67(1):61–98. doi: 10.1111/peps.12038 Riedl, R, Hubert, M & Kenning, P. 2010. Are there neural gender differences in online trust? An FMRI study on the perceived trustworthiness of eBay offers. MIS Quarterly 34(2):397–428. [Online]. Available: Business Source Complete database [Accessed 7 July 2010]. Rogers, RW & Riddle, S. 2003. Trust in the workplace. [Online]. Available: http://www.ddiworld. com/pdf/ddi_trustmonograph_mg.pdf [Accessed 26 February 2009]. Rousseau, DM, Sitkin, SB, Burt, RS & Camerer, C. 1998. Not so different after all: A crossdiscipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review 23(3):393–404. doi: 10.5465/ AMR.1998.926617 Said, CP, Baron, SG & Todorov, A. 2009. Nonlinear amygdala response to face trustworthiness: Contributions of high and low spatial frequency information. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 21(3):519–528. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2009.21041 Schoorman, FD, Mayer, RC & Davis, JH. 2007. An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Review, 322:344–354. doi: 10.5465/ AMR.2007.24348410 Searle, RH, Weibel, A & Den Hartog, DN. 2011. Employee trust in organizational contexts. In GP Hodgkinson and JK Ford (Eds). International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology 26:143–191. New York, NY: Wiley Online Library. Sendjaya, S & Pekerti, A. 2010. Servant leadership as antecedent of trust in organizations. Leadership and Organization Development Journal 31(7):643–663. doi: 10.1108/01437731011079673 Şengün, AE & Wasti, SN. 2011. Trust types, distrust, and performance outcomes in small business relationships: The pharmacy–drug warehouse case. Service Industries Journal 31(2):287– 309. doi: 10.1080/02642060902759137 Shaw, RB. 1997. Trust in the balance. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Six, F, Nooteboom, B & Hoogendoorn, A. 2010. Actions that build interpersonal trust: A relational signalling perspective. Review of Social Economy 68(3):285–315. doi: 10.1080/00346760902756487

168

References

Six, F & Skinner, D. 2010. Managing trust and trouble in interpersonal work relationships: Evidence from two Dutch organizations. International Journal of HR Management 21(1):09–124. doi: 10.1080/09585190903466913 Sousa-Lima, M, Michel, JW & Caetano, A. 2013. Clarifying the importance of trust in organizations as a component of effective work relationships. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 43(2):418–427. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2013.01012 Spector, B. 2003. HRM at Enron: The unindicted co-conspirator. Organizational Dynamics 32(2):207–220. doi: 10.1016/S0090-26160300019-6 Storey, J, Ulrich, D, Welbourne, TM & Wright, PM. 2009. Employee engagement. In J Storey, PM Wright and D Ulrich (Eds). The Routledge companion to strategic HR management: Chapter 18. London: Routledge. Tan, HH & Lim, AKH. 2009. Trust in co-workers and trust in organizations. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied 143(1):45–66. doi: 10.3200/JRLP.143.1.45-66 Tan, HH & Tan, CSF. 2000. Toward the differentiation of trust in supervisor and trust in organization. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs 126(2):241. [Online]. Available: ProQuest Psychology Journals database. Document ID: 54565698. [Accessed 6 April 2009]. Thorgren, S & Wincent, J. 2011. Interorganizational trust: Origins, dysfunctions and regulation of rigidities. British Journal of Management 22(1):21–41. doi: 10.1111/j.14678551.2010.00717.x Todorov, A, Pakrashi, M & Oosterhof, NN. 2009. Evaluating faces on trustworthiness after minimal time exposure. Social Cognition, 276:813–833. doi: 10.1521/soco.2009.27.6.813 Tomlinson, EC. 2011. The context of trust repair efforts: Exploring the role of relationship dependence and outcome severity. Journal of Trust Research 12:139–157. doi: 10.1080/21515581.2011.603507 Tomlinson, EC, Dineen, B & Lewicki, RJ. 2004. The road to reconciliation: Antecedents of victim willingness to reconcile following a broken promise. Journal of Management 30(2):165–187. doi: 10.1016/j.jm.2003.01.003 Tomlinson, EC & Mayer, RC. 2009. The role of causal attribution dimensions in trust repair. Academy of Management Review 34(1):85–104. doi: 10.5465/AMR.2009.35713291 Towers W. 2012. 2012 Global Workforce Study: EMEA highlights. [Online] Available from http:// www.towerswatson.com/en/Insights/IC-Types/Survey-Research-Results/2013/04/2012Global-Workforce-Study-EMEA-highlights [Accessed 31 May 2013]. Trafford, V. 2014. Conceptual frameworks as a threshold concept in doctorateness. Keynote address delivered at the National PhD Conference in Accounting, Economic and Management Sciences, University of South Africa, Pretoria, 11–12 August 2014. Trafford, V & Leshem, S. 2012. Stepping stones to achieving your doctorate by focusing on your viva from the start. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press. Von der Ohe, H. 2014. An exploratory study on organisational trust relationships. PhD dissertation. Pretoria: University of South Africa.

169

Employee engagement in a South African context

Von der Ohe, H & Martins, N. 2010. Exploring trust relationships during times of change. South African Journal of HR Management 8(1). doi: 10.4102/sajhrm.v8i1.256: [Online] Available: http://www.sajhrm.co.za/index.php/sajhrm/article/view/256/261 [Accessed 15 February 2016]. Von der Ohe, H & Van der Walt, HS. 1988. Verslag oor ‘n opname in 1980 en 1981 in verband met die skiktydstelsel. Pretoria: RGN, Instituut vir Psigologiese en Edumetriese Navorsing:80. Walterbusch, M, Gräuler, M & Teuteberg, F. 2014. How trust is defined: A qualitative and quantitative analysis of scientific literature. Paper accepted for presentation at the 20th Americas Conference on Information Systems AMCIS 2014, Savannah, Georgia from 7–9 August 2014. [Online]. Avialable: http://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1142 &context=amcis2014 [Accessed 9 July 2014]. Watson Wyatt Worldwide Research Report, Work USAs. 2002. Weathering the storm: A study of employee attitudes and opinions. [Online]. Available: http://www.watsonwyatt.com/ research/resrender.asp?id+w-557&page=1 [Accessed 4 March 2014]. Whitener, EM. 1997. The impact of HR activities on subordinate trust. HR Management Review 74:389–405. doi: 10.1016/S1053-48229790026-7 Whitener, EM, Brodt, SE, Korsgaard, MA & Werner, JM. 1998. Managers as initiators of trust: An exchange relationship framework for understanding managerial trustworthy behavior. Academy of Management Review 23(3):513–530. doi: 10.5465/AMR.1998.926624 Wöhrle, J, Van Oudenhoven, JP, Otten, S & Van der Zee, KI. 2014. Personality characteristics and workplace trust of majority and minority employees in the Netherlands. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology [Online] Available. http://www.tandfonline. com/doi/abs/10.1080/1359432X.2014.891583

[Accessed:

04

March

2014].

doi:

10.1080/1359432X.2014.891583 Yakovleva, M, Reilly, RR & Werko, R. 2010. Why do we trust? Moving beyond individual to dyadic perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology 95(1):79–91. doi: 10.1037/a0017102 Zand, DE. 1997. The leadership triad: knowledge, trust and power. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Zecca, G, Verardi, S, Antonietti, J-P, Dahourou, D, Adjahouisso, M, Ah-Kion, J et al. 2013. African cultures and the Five-Factor Model of personality: Evidence for a specific panAfrican structure and profile? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 44(5):684–700. doi: 10.1177/0022022112468943 Zeffane, R & Connell, J. 2003. Trust and HRM in the new millennium. International Journal of HR Management 14(1):3–11. doi: 10.1080/09585190210158484

Chapter 6 Bar-On, R. 2005. EQ-I Bar-on Emotional quotient inventory: Technical manual. Toronto: MultiHealth Systems. Bateman, GW & Bobbett, W. 2001. Zanzibar tales: Told by the natives of Eastern Africa. Woodstock: Galley Publications.

170

References

Beck, D. 2013. The Master Code. Spiral Dynamics Integral Accreditation. Unpublished course notes. Santa Barbara, CA: Adizes Business School. Beck, D. & Cowan, C. 1996, 2006. Spiral dynamics: Mastering values, leadership and change. New York, NY: Chichester. BeQ Accreditation Manual. 2015. Available at Randburg: Mandala Consulting. BeQ Reports: Australia 2013. Available at Randburg: Mandala Consulting. BeQ Reports: China 2012. Available at Randburg: Mandala Consulting. BeQ Reports: Ghana 2008. Available at Randburg: Mandala Consulting. BeQ Reports: Ghana 2009. Available at Randburg: Mandala Consulting. BeQ Reports: Ghana 2010. Available at Randburg: Mandala Consulting. BeQ Reports: Ghana 2011. Available at Randburg: Mandala Consulting. BeQ Reports: Ghana 2012. Available at Randburg: Mandala Consulting. BeQ Reports: Tanzania 2012. Available at Randburg: Mandala Consulting. Brewer, P. & Venaik, S. 2014. The ecological fallacy in national culture research. Organization Studies 357:1063–1086. Cilliers, F. & May, M. 2002. South African diversity dynamics. Reporting on the 2000 Robben Island Diversity Experience. A Group Relations event. South African Journal of Labour Relations 263:42–68. Christie, P, Lessem, R & Mbigi, L. 1994: African management: Philosophies, concepts and applications. Randburg: Knowledge Resources. DePree, M. 1989 Leadership is an art. New York: Doubleday. Graves, C. 1974. Human nature prepares for a momentous leap. Futurist April:72–87. Hayes, P. 2011. Global leadership and human systems integration. Fort Wayne, IN: Indiana Institute of Technology. House, RJ, Hanges, PJ, Javidan, M, Dorfman, PW & Gupta, V. (Eds). 2004. Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hofstede, GJ. 1980. Culture’s consequences. London: Sage. Hofstede, GJ. 2005. Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. Revised and expanded 2nd edition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Jackson, T. 2004. Cross-cultural theory and methods: Management and change in Africa. London: Routledge. Jung, CG. 1954. On the nature of the psyche. 1988 edition. London: Ark Paperbacks. Contained in Collected Works Vol. 8. Jung, CG, Von Franz, ML, Henderson, LJ, Jacobi, J & Jaffe, A. 1978. A man and his symbols. London: Picador Pan. Laubscher, LI. 2013. Human niches: Spiral dynamics for Africa. PhD dissertation. Da Vinci Institute: Modderfontein. Lessem, R. & Nussbaum, B. 1997. Sawubona Africa. Cape Town: Struik. Lessem, R. 1993. Four worlds: the South African business sphere. In P Christie, R Lessem, & L Mbigi (Eds.). African management: Philosophy, concepts and applications. Randburg: Knowledge Resources.

171

Employee engagement in a South African context

Rodgers, CR. 1985. Carl Rogers on personal power. London: Constable. Sagiv, L & Schwartz, SH. 2000. A new look at national culture: Illustrative applications to role stress and managerial behaviour. In NM Ashkanasy, CPM Wilderom & MF Peterson (Eds). Handbook of Organizational Culture and climate: 417–435. Trompenaars, F & Hampden-Turner, C. 1997 Riding the waves of culture. Burr Ridge: Irwin. Venaik, S & Brewer, P. 2013. Critical issues in the Hofstede and GLOBE national culture models. International Marketing Review 30(5):469–482. Viljoen, RC. 2008. Sustainable organisational transformation. Unpublished DBL Thesis. Midrand: SBL Unisa. Viljoen, RC. 2014. Inclusive organizational transformation: An African perspective on human niches and diversity of thought. Farnham, UK: Gower. Viljoen, RC. & Laubscher, L. 2014 Spiral dynamics. In R Lessem & A Schieffer (Eds). Integral polity. Farnham, UK: Gower. Viljoen, RC. & Laubscher, L 2015. African spiritual consciousness at work. Indigenous spiritualties at work: Transforming the spirit of business enterprise. In C Piller & R Wolfgramm (Eds). Indigenous spiritualities at work: Transforming the spirit of business enterprise. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.  Viljoen, RC. 2015. Organisational Change and Development: an African Perspective. Randburg: Knowledge Resources.

Chapter 7 Ackoff, RL. 2003. Iconoclastic management authority, advocates a “systemic” approach to innovation. Strategy & Leadership 313:19–26. Buhlungu, S. 1999. A question of power: Co-determination and trade union capacity. African Sociology Review 3(1):111–129. Cooperrider, D, Whitney, D & Stravos, J. 2003 Appreciative enquiry handbook. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koeher. Hans Böckler Stiftung. 2011. Co-determination in Germany. A beginner’s guide. Düsseldorf, Germany: Hans-Böckler-Stiftung. Kaplan, RS & Norton, DP. 2006. Alignment: using the balanced score card to create corporate synergies. Boston, MA: HBS Press. Kluge, N. 2011. Worker participation in the boardrooms throughout Europe. Hans Bockler Foundation. Laubscher, LI. 2013. Human Niches: Spiral Dynamics for Africa. PhD dissertation. Da Vinci Institute: Modderfontein. Muswaka, L. 2014. The two-tier structure and co-determination: Should South Africa follow the German example? Mediterranean Journal of Social Science 5(9):142–147. Prenting, T. 1992. Co-determination: Its practice and applicability to the United States of America. [Online] Available: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Co-determination%3a+its+practice+and+ applicability+to+the+U.S.-a013574520 [Accessed 15 February 2016].

172

References

Schutte, PC. 2004. Employee satisfaction and customer service: A literature perspective. Johannesburg: IGH. Unpublished. Summers, C.W. 1982. Co-determination in the United States of America: A projection of problems and potentials. Journal of Comparative Corporate law and Securities Regulation 4:155–191. University of Nebraska. 1997. Soft Skills Wheel. [Online]. Available: http://liferay.unl.edu. [Accessed 21 September 1997]. Viljoen, RC. 2008. Sustainable organisational transformation. Unpublished DBL Thesis. Available at the SBL: Unisa. Midrand: Unisa. Viljoen, RC. 2014. Inclusive organizational transformation: An African perspective on human niches and diversity of thought. Farnham, UK: Gower. Viljoen, RC & Laubscher, LI. 2015. African spiritual consciousness at work. In C Piller & R Wolfgramm (Eds). Indigenous spiritualties at work: Transforming the spirit of business enterprise. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.  Viljoen, RC. 2015. Organisational change and development: An African perspective. Braynston, South Africa: Knowledge Resources. Viljoen, RC & Laubscher, L. 2014. Spiral Dynamics. In R Lessem & A Schieffer (Eds). An integral polity. Farnham, UK: Gower. Webster, E & Macun, I. 2009. A trend towards co-determination? Case study of South African enterprises. [Online] Available: http://www.saflii.org/za/journals/LDD/1998/5.pdf [Accessed 15 February 2016].

173

Employee engagement in a South African context

ENDNOTES Chapter 1 Endnotes 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.

174

Jeung, 2011; Schaufeli & Salanova, 2008. Bakker & Schaufeli, 2008; Schaufeli & Salanova, 2011. Luthans, Youssef & Avolio, 2007; Schaufeli & Salanova, 2008. Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000. Luthans & Youssef, 2007; Bakker & Schaufeli, 2008; Ouweneel, LeBlanc & Schaufeli, 2012. Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000. Bakker & Schaufeli, 2008; Ouweneel et al., 2012. Luthans & Youssef, 2007, p. 327. Botha & Mostert, 2014. Bakker, Albrecht & Leiter, 2011; Bakker & Schaufeli, 2008; Luthans & Youssef, 2007. Harter, Schmidt, & Hayes, 2002; Saks, 2006. Albrecht, 2010; Rothmann & Rothmann, 2010; Shuck & Reio, 2011. Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004. Jeung, 2011; Rothmann & Rothmann, 2010. Halbesleben & Wheeler, 2008. Bakker et al., 2011; Shuck & Wollard, 2010. Christian, Garza & Slaughter, 2011; Shuck & Wollard, 2010. Cole, Walter, Bedeian & O’Boyle 2012; Macey & Schneider, 2008. Schaufeli & Salanova, 2011. Nienaber & Martins, 2014. Ibid. Bakker et al., 2011; Cole et al., 2012. Bakker & Leiter, 2010; Macey & Schneider, 2008. Harter et al., 2002; Shuck, Reio & Rocco, 2011. Cole et al, 2012. Harter et al., 2002, p. 269. Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004. Harter et al., 2002; Macey & Schneider, 2008; Zigarmi, Nimon, Wouson, Witt & Diehl, 2009. Nienaber & Martins, 2014. Macey & Schneider, 2008.

31. Nienaber & Martins, 2014; Schaufeli & Salanova, 2011. 32. Macey & Schneider, 2008. 33. Macey & Schneider 2008; Zigarmi et al., 2009. 34. May, Gilson & Harter, 2004. 35. May et al. 2004, p. 12. 36. May et al. 2004, p. 13. 37. Roberts & Davenport, 2002. 38. Kahn, 1990. 39. Harter et al., 2002; Rich, LePine & Crawford, 2010. 40. Kahn, 1990, p. 700. 41. Ibid., p. 694. 42. Olivier & Rothmann, 2007. 43. May et al., 2004; Rich et al., 2010. 44. Kahn, 1990. 45. May et al., 2004. 46. Rich et al., 2010, p. 619. 47. Maslach, Schuafeli & Leiter, 2001; Schaufeli, 2013. 48. Maslach & Leiter, 1997. 49. Schaufeli, Salanova, González-Romá & Bakker, 2002. 50. Schaufeli et al, 2002, p. 74. 51. Bakker & Demerouti, 2007. 52. Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004. 53. Schaufeli, 2013. 54. Harter et al., 2002. 55. Harter et al., 2002, p. 269. 56. Ibid., see endnote 54 57. Harter et al., 2002. 58. Saks, 2006. 59. Saks, 2006, p. 600. 60. Ibid., p. 602. 61. Harter et al., 2002; Kahn, 1990; Maslach et al., 2001. 62. Macey &Schneider, 2008. 63. Crawford, Le Pine & Rich, 2010. 64. Macey & Schneider, 2008, p. 25. 65. Coetzee & Rothmann, 2007. 66. Coetzee & De Villiers, 2010; Kahn, 1990; Olivier & Rothmann, 2007. 67. Kahn, 1990, p. 694. 68. Simpson, 2009. 69. Kahn, 1990. 70. Ibid. 71. Shuck et al., 2011. 72. Rothmann & Welsh, 2013. 73. Jeung, 2011; Rothmann & Welsh, 2013. 74. Moshoeu & Geldenhuys, 2015.

Endnotes 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88.

89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96.

97. 98. 99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. 108. 109. 110. 111. 112. 113. 114.

Jeung, 2011; Rothmann & Welsh, 2013. May et al., 2004. Kahn, 1990, p. 708. Jeung, 2011; Rothmann & Welsh, 2013. Hakanen, Schaufeli & Ahola, 2008. Bakker & Demerouti, 2007. Kahn, 1990, p.705. May et al., 2004; Rothmann & Rothmann, 2010. Rothmann & Rothmann, 2010. Van Zyl, Deacon & Rothmann, 2010. Rothmann & Welsh, 2013. Olivier & Rothmann, 2007. Kahn, 1990. May et al., 2004; Olivier & Rothmann, 2007; Rothmann & Rothmann, 2010; Rothmann & Welsh, 2013. Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004. Cole et al., 2012; Mäkikangas, Kinnunen, Rantanen, Mauno, Tolvanen & Bakker, 2014. Maslach et al., 2001, Mäkikangas et al., 2014. Rothmann & Joubert, 2007. Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; Rothmann & Joubert, 2007. Moshoeu & Geldenhuys, 2015. Schaufeli et al., 2002; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004. Bakker, Schaufeli, Leiter & Taris, 2008; Mäkikangas, et al., 2014; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; 2010. Schaufeli, Bakker & Van Rhenen, 2009. Schaufeli et al., 2002; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; 2010. Bakker et al., 2008; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004. Gorgievski & Bakker, 2010. May et al, 2004. Schaufeli et al. 2002. Moshoeu & Geldenhuys, 2015. Kahn 1990; Schaufeli, 2013. Schaufeli and colleagues, 2008. Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; Stander & Rothmann, 2007. Schaufeli & Salanova, 2007. Schaufeli et al., 2002; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004. Bakker & Demerouti, 2007. Schaufeli et al., 2002; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004. Csikszentmihalyi, 1990. Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004. Bakker, Demerouti & Euwema, 2005. Csikszentmihalyi, 1990.

115. Brand-Labuschagne, Mostert, Rothmann & Rothmann, 2012; Mäkikangas et al., 2014. 116. Coetzee & De Villiers, 2010; Mäkikangas et al., 2014. 117. Rothmann & Jouber, 2007. 118. Schaufeli et al., 2002. 119. Demerouti, Mostert & Bakker, 2010; Mäkikangas et al., 2014. 120. Demerouti et al., 2010. 121. Bakker et al., 2008; Brand-Labuschagne et al., 2012; Demerouti et al., 2010. 122. Demerouti et al., 2010. 123. Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Schaufeli & Salanova, 2007. 124. Luthans & Youssef, 2007. 125. Demerouti & Bakker, 2011. 126. Bakker & Demerouti, 2007, p. 275. 127. Crawford et al., 2010. 128. Schaufeli, 2013. 129. Xanthopoulou, Bakker, Demerouti & Schaufeli, 2009. 130. Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; 2008; Schaufeli, 2013. 131. According to Hobfoll, 2002. 132. Brand-Labuschagne et al., 2012; Crawford et al., 2010; Demerouti & Bakker, 2011. 133. Bakker & Demerouti, 2008; Ouweneel et al., 2012; Schaufeli, 2013. 134. Xanthopoulou et al., 2009. 135. Xanthopoulou, Bakker, Demerouti & Schaufeli, 2007. 136. Salanova et al., 2010. 137. Salanova, Schaufeli, Xanthopoulou & Bakker, 2010. 138. Mäkikangas, Feldt, Kinnunen & Mauno, 2013. 139. Xanthopoulou et al., 2007. 140. Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Demerouti & Bakker, 2011; Van den Broeck et al., 2013. 141. Schaufeli, 2013. 142. Haslbesleben, 2010; Mauno et al., 2007; Van den Broeck et al., 2013. 143. Hobfoll, 2002. 144. Hobfoll, 2002. 145. Bakker, Van Veldhoven & Xanthopoulou, 2010; Hobfoll, 2002. 146. Sonnentag & Fritz, 2007. 147. Ibid. 148. According to Sonnentag & Fritz, 2007. 149. Bakker et al., 2010. 150. According to Salanova et al., 2010. 151. Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Rich et al., 2010. 152. Halbesleben, 2011. 153. Schaufeli & Salanova, 2008.

175

Employee engagement in a South African context 154. 155. 156. 157. 158. 159. 160. 161. 162. 163. 164. 165. 166.

Chughtai & Buckley, 2008. Harter et al., 2002. Harter et al., 2002, p. 276. Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004b. Allen & Meyer, 1990. Salami, 2008. Halbesleben & Wheeler, 2008. Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004. Saks, 2006. Ibid. Macey & Schneider, 2008. Ibid., p. 25. Halbesleben et al., 2009.

Chapter 2 Endnotes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

176

CIPD, 2014a. Fearon, McLaughlin & Morris, 2013. Harter, Schmidt & Hayes, 2002. Schaufeli & Salanova, 2011. Andrews, 1987. Ansoff, 1965. Drucker, 1954, Nilsson & Elström, 2012. Ployhart et al., 2014. Aguinis, 2013. Mankins & Steele, 2005. Mintzberg, 1994. Van der Merwe & Nienaber, 2015. Kahn, 1990. Bakker, Albrecht & Leiter, 2011. Guest, 2014. Klassen et al., 2012, p. 334. Viljevac et al., 2012, p. 3706. Aguinis & Edwards, 2014, p. 144. Attridge, 2009. Saks, 2006, p. 601. Kahn, 1990. Schaufelli, Salanova, González-Romá & Bakker, 2002. Kahn, 1990, p. 694. Goffman, 1961. Schaufeli et al. , 2002. Kahn, 1990, p. 693. Ibid., p. 694. Ibid., p. 692. Ibid., p. 693. Ibid., p. 692/3. Ibid., p. 694. Ibid., p. 700. Hackman & Oldham, 1980. Lawler & Hall, 1970.

36 Csikszentmihalyi, 1982. 37 Langer, 1989. 38 Deci, 1975. 39 Kahn, 1990, p. 700. 40 Ibid. 41 Perkins, 1981. 42 Hirschman, 1970. 43 Rafaeli & Sutton, 1987. 44 Baxter, 1982. 45 Gibb, 1961. 46 Kahn, 1989. 47 Toffler, 1986. 48 Kahn, 1990. 49 Kahn, 1990, p. 695. 50 Oldham & Hackman, 1980. 51 Alderfer, 1985. 52 Ployhart et al., 2014. 53 Shantz & Alfes, 2015. 54 Kahn, 1990, p. 703. 55 Ibid. 56 May, Gilson & Harter, 2004. 57 Saks, 2006, p. 603. 58 Blau, 1964. 59 Rothbard, 2001. 60 Ibid, p. 656. 61 Kahn, 1990. 62 Rothbard, 2001, p. 656/7. 63 Ibid. 64 Ibid. 65 Ibid, p. 657. 66 Ibid. 67 Kahn, 1990. 68 Schaufeli, Salanova, González-Romá & Bakker, 2002. 69 Kahn, 1990. 70 Brough, Dollard and Tuckey, 2014. 71 Kayastha, Murthy & Adhikary, 2013, p. 149. 72 Beehr & Newman, 1978. 73 Schaufeli et al., 2002, p. 74. 74 Ibid. 75 Ibid. 76 Kahn, 1990. 77 Schaufeli et al., 2002. 78 Fearon et al., 2013. 79 Harter et al., 2002. 80 Macey & Schnieder, 2008. 81 Saks, 2006. 82 Dyer, 2009. 83 Nienaber & Martins, 2015. 84 Greenwald, 2008. 85 Griseri, 2013. 86 Ployhart et al., 2014, p. 379. 87 Drucker, 1094.

Endnotes 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140

Goldman, Nienaber & Pretorius, 2015. Kahn, 1990. Schaufelli et al., 2002. Kahn, 1990. Schaufeli et al., 2002. Fearon et al., 2013. Shantz & Alfes, 2015. CIPD, 2014. Fearon et al., 2013, p. 249. Ployhart et al., 2014. CIPD, 2014. Shantz & Alfes, 2015. CIPD, 2013; 2014; Shantz & Alfes, 2015. CIPD, 2014. Ansoff & McDonnell, 1990. Nag, Hambrick & Chen, 2007. Jarzabkowski & Spee, 2009. Griseri, 2013. Porter, 1985; 1998. Barney, 1991. Huselid, 1995. Ployhart et al., 2014. Shantz & Alfes, 2015. Sirmon, Hitt, Ireland & Gilbert, 2011. Barney, 1991. Sirmon et al., 2011. Ployhart et al., 2014, p. 379. Nienaber, Cant & Strydom, 2002. Ordóñez de Pablo & Lytras, 2008. Barney, 1991. Robert Owen, 1813. Bartlett & Ghoshal, 2002. Campbell et al., 2012. Lewis, 2011. Lockwood, 2007. Beechler & Woodward, 2009. Farndale, Scullion & Sparrow, 2010. Schuler, Jackson & Tarique, 2011. Vaiman, Scullion & Collings, 2012. Campbell et al., 2012. CIPD, 2014a. Farndale et al., 2010. Halogen, 2015. Nilsson & Ellström, 2012. Schuler et al., 2011. Vaiman et al., 2012. Carr, Inkson & Thorn, 2005. Holtom et al., 2008. Beechler & Woodward, 2009. Buahene & Kovary, 2007. Moss, 2014. Becker, 1962. Campbell et al., 2012.

141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158

Nilsson & Ellström, 2012. Ployhart et al., 2014. Huselid, 1995. Campbell et al., 2012. Jarzabkowski & Spee, 2009, p. 69. Aguinis, 2013. Alexander, 1985. Cocks, 2010. Mankins & Steele, 2005. Mintzberg, 1994. Porter, 1985, 1998. Robert, 1991. Sandy, 1991. Schaap, 2012. Van der Merwe & Nienaber, 2015. Nag, Hambrick & Chen, 2007. Martins & Nienaber, 2014; 2015. Martins & Nienaber, 2014; 2015

Chapter 3 Endnotes 1 2

Heen & Linn, 2015, np. Viljoen, 2014.

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

Laubscher & Viljoen, 2015. Collins, 2014. Estes, nd. Ackoff, 1979. Viljoen, 2008. Sparkes, 2005. Sparkes, 2005. Beck & Cohan, 1996. Laubscher, 2012. Hofstede, 1991. Viljoen, 2015. Viljoen, 2008. Viljoen, 2015 Viljoen, 2014. Cresswell & Clark, 2003. Creswell & Clark, 2011, p. 70. BeQ Accreditation Manual, 2015. BeQ Accreditation Manual, 2015. Viljoen, 2014. Schutte, 2003. Viljoen, 2015. Viljoen, 2008. Perea, cited by Hyter & Turnock, 2005. Kraft & Sakofs, 1988. Erickson, 1987. Spindler & Spindler, 1992. Russel, 2004.

177

Employee engagement in a South African context 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50

62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69

LeBeron, 2005. Miller & Katz, 2003. Hyter & Turnock, 2005. Faqua & Newman, 2002. Botha & Schutte, 2003. Viljoen, 2008, p. 360. Jung, 1973. Random House Unabridged Dictionary, 2006. Conference Board of Canada, 2006, p. 3. Macey and Schneider’s, 2008. Viljoen, 2015. Benson, 2006. Viljoen, 2015, p. 55. Corporate Leadership Council, 2004. BeQ Accreditation Manual, 2015. Viljoen, 2015. BeQ Accreditation Manual, 2015. Schutte, 2004. Viljoen, 2008. Random House Unabridged Dictionary, 2006. American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 2007. WordNet, 2006. Brown, Condor, Mathews, Wade & Williams, 1986. Hennessy & West, 1999. Hinkle, Taylor & Fox-Cardomone, 1989. Van Knippenberg, 2000. Booysen, 2007. Random House Unabridged Dictionary, 2006. Kernerman English Multilingual Dictionary, 2015. American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 2007. Random House Unabridged Dictionary, 2015. American Heritage Stedman’s Medical Dictionary, 2002. WordNet, 2006. Heron & Reason, 2002. Cooperrider, 1990. Viljoen, 2008. Jöreskog, 1971. Viljoen, 2015. BeQ Accreditation Manual, 2015. Harrison, 2008.

70

Jung, 1953.

51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61

178

Chapter 4 Endnotes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

SABPP October 2014. Schaufeli & Salanova, 2011. Nienaber & Martins, 2015. Nienaber & Martins, 2014. Macey & Schneider, 2008. Adapted from Macey & Schneider, 2008, p. 6. Macey & Schneider, 2008, p. 6. Ibid. Ibid. Nienaber & Martins, 2014.

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Ibid. Simpson, 2009. Imandim, Bisschoff & Botha, 2014. Nienaber & Martins, 2014. Remenyi, 2014. Nienaber & Martins 2014, p. 493. Nienaber & Martins 2015. Ibid. Anstey, 2013.

Chapter 5 Endnotes 1 2

Macey & Schneider, 2008. Martins, 2000, 2002; Martins & Von der Ohe, 2011. 3 Agarwal, 2014, p. 53. 4 Halbesleben, 2011. 5 Halbesleben & Wheeler, 2012. 6 Agarwal, 2014; Blau, 1989. 7 Chughtai & Buckley, 2008; Lin, 2010. 8 So-called “employee voice”; Rees, Alfes & Gatenby, 2013. 9 Bachmann & Inkpen, 2011; Currall & Epstein, 2003; Fulmer & Gelfand, 2012; Gillespie & Dietz, 2009; Rogers & Riddle, 2003; Schoorman, Mayer & Davies, 2007; Spector, 2003. 10 Searle, Weibel & Den Hartog, 2011. 11 Shaw, 1976; Zeffane & Connel, 2003. 12 Paliszkiewicz, 2011. 13 Edelman, 2014. 14 Ibid. 15 Ibid. 16 Nooteboom, 2007. 17 Edelman, 2014. 18 Dirks & Ferrin, 2001.

Endnotes 19 Colquitt, Scott & LePine, 2007. 20 Searle et al., 2011. 21 Ibid. 22 Gargiulo & Ertug, 2006. 23 Fukuyama, 1995. 24 Halbesleben, 2011; Macey & Schneider, 2008. 25 Storey, Ulrich, Welbourne & Wright, 2009, p. 301. 26 Searle et al., 2011. 27 Sousa-Lima, Michel & Caetano, 2013. 28 McCrae et al., 2013; Zecca et al., 2013. 29 Dietz, 2011. 30 Tan & Lim, 2009. 31 Atkinson & Butcher, 2003; Connel, Ferres & Travaglione, 2003; Rousseau, Sitkin, Burt & Camerer, 1998; Walterbusch, Gräuler & Teuteberg, 2014. 32 Walterbusch et al., 2014, p. 8. 33 Rousseau et al., 1998, p. 395. 34 Mayer, Davis & Schoorman, 1995, p. 712. 35 Mayer et al., 1995, p. 712. 36 Martins, 2000, p. 28. 37 Nooteboom, 2007. 38 Luhmann, 1968. 39 Grabner-Kräuter & Kaluscha, 2003. 40 Rousseau et al., 1998. 41 Lewicki, Tomlinson & Gillespie, 2006. 42 Rousseau et al., 1998. 43 Mayer et al., 1995. 44 Rousseau et al., 1998; Yakovleva, Reilly & Werko, 2010. 45 Searle et al., 2011. 46 Dietz & Den Hartog, 2006. 47 Kramer & Lewicki, 2010. 48 Ibid, p. 247. 49 Martins & Von der Ohe, 2003, p. 48. 50 Dietz & Den Hartog, 2006. 51 Mayer et al., 1995. 52 Cunningham & MacGregor, 2000. 53 Mishra, 1996. 54 Dietz & Den Hartog, 2006. 55 Ibid, p. 561 56 Yakovleva et al., 2010. 57 Martins, 2000, p. 28. 58 Martins, 2000. 59 Fulmer and Gelfand, 2012. 60 Fulmer & Gelfand, 2012, p. 1174. 61 Fulmer & Gelfand, 2012.

62 63 64

Martins, 2000. McEvily & Tortoriello, 2011. Kramer, 1999; Lewicki et al., 2006; Searle et al., 2011. 65 Mayer et al., 1995. 66 Ibid. 67 Ibid. 68 Bews, 2000. 69 Mayer et al., 1995, p. 711. 70 Clark & Payne, 1997. 71 Searle et al., 2011. 72 Mayer et al., 1995, p. 711. 73 Engelbrecht & Cloete, 2000; Mayer et al., 1995. 74 Mayer et al., 1995. 75 Ashleigh, Higgs & Dulewicz, 2012. 76 Clarke & Payne, 1997; Engelbrecht & Cloete, 2000; Mayer et al., 1995. 77 Chughtai & Buckley, 2008, p. 50. 78 Hamm et al., 2013. 79 Dietz, Gillespie & Chao, 2010. 80 Lount & Pettit, 2012. 81 Mayer et al., 1995. 82 Ibid. 83 84 Mayer et al., 1995, p. 712. 85 Ibid. 86 Mayer et al., 1995, p. 715. 87 Yakovleva et al., 2010, p. 79. 88 Yakovleva et al., 2010. 89 Ibid. 90 Searle et al., 2011. 91 Yakovleva et al., 2010. 92 Searle et al., 2011. 93 e.g. Kramer, 1999; Lewicki et al., 2006; Searle et al., 2011. 94 Mayer et al., 1995. 95 Dietz et al., 2010. 96 Colquitt et al., 2007. 97 Mayer et al., 1995; Lapidot, Kark & Shamir, 2007. 98 Cho & Ringquist, 2011, p. 55. 99 Mayer et al., 1995. 100 Cho & Ringquist, 2011. 101 Mayer et al., 1995, p. 717. 102 Engelbrecht & Cloete, 2000. 103 Butler, 1991. 104 Mishra, 1996.

179

Employee engagement in a South African context 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112

Clarke & Payne, 1997. Kramer & Lewicki, 2010. Mayer et al., 1995, p. 718. Engelbrecht & Cloete, 2000, p. 25. Mayer et al., 1995, p. 719. Mayer et al., 1995. Mayer et al., 1995, p. 724. Wöhrle, Van Oudenhoven, Otten & Van der Zee, 2014, p. 3. 113 Martins, Watkins, Von der Ohe and De Beer, 1997. 114 Martins & Von der Ohe, 2005. 115 Martins, 2000. 116 Von der Ohe & Martins, 2010. 117 Costa & McCrae, 2010. 118 Barrick & Mount, 1991. 119 Gosling, Rentfrow & Swann, 2003. 120 Martins, 2000. 121 Oh, Wang & Mount, 2011. 122 Barrick, Mount & Judge, 2001; Oh, Wang & Mount, 2011. 123 Martins, 2000. 124 Whitener, 1997. 125 Brower, Lester, Korsgaard & Dineen, 2009. 126 Cho & Poister, 2013, 2014. 127 Mayer et al., 1995. 128 Ibid. 129 Martins, 2000. 130 Ibid. 131 Mayer et al., 1995. 132 Ibid. 133 Martins & Von der Ohe, 2005. 134 Martins, 2000. 135 Trafford & Leshem, 2012. 136 Norman, 1963. 137 Martins, 2000. 138 Mayer et al., 1995. 139 Trafford, 2014. 140 Von der Ohe, 2014. 141 Martins, 2000. 142 Mayer et al., 1995. 143 Martins, 2000. 144 Mayer et al., 1995. 145 Ibid. 146 Dirks & Ferrin, 2002. 147 Dirks & Ferrin, 2002, p. 614. 148 Ibid, p. 622. 149 Reiche et al., 2014, p. 87.

180

150 Watson Wyatt Worldwide Research, 2002. 151 Towers Watson, 2012. 152 Chan, Lam & Lui, 2011. 153 Hiller et al., 2011. 154 Li, 2008. 155 Ibid. 156 Mayer & Gavin, 2005, p. 883. 157 Grant & Sumanth, 2009. 158 Ibid. 159 Zand, 1997. 160 Ibid. 161 Burke, Sims, Lazzara & Salas, 2007. 162 Mayer et al., 1995. 163 Atkinson & Butcher, 2003. 164 Kovač & Jesenko, 2010. 165 Crossley, Cooper & Wernsing, 2013. 166 Crossley et al., 2013. 167 Ibid, p. 547. 168 Malaysia, Hassan & Ahmed, 2011. 169 Tan & Tan, 2000. 170 Sendjaya & Pekerti, 2010. 171 Mishra & Mishra, 2013. 172 Ibid. 173 Gao, Janssen & Shi, 2011; Gargiulo & Ertug, 2006; Thorgren & Wincent, 2011. 174 Gargiulo & Ertug, 2006. 175 Ibid. 176 Dirks & Ferrin, 2001, p. 464. 177 Nooteboom, Berger & Noorderhaven, 1997. 178 Thorgren & Wincent, 2011, p. 21. 179 Thorgren & Wincent, 2011. 180 Goel, Bell & Pierce, 2005, p. 203. 181 Halbesleben, 2011. 182 Goel et al., 2005. 183 Bakker, Albrecht & Leiter, 2011; George, 2011; Halbesleben, 2011. 184 Gao et al., 2011, p. 788. 185 Posten & Mussweiler, 2013, p. 1. 186 Bews & Rossouw, 2002. 187 Lewicki, McAllister & Bies, 1998. 188 Lewicki et al., 1998, p. 439. 189 Lewicki et al., 2006, p. 1002. 190 Luhmann, e.g. 1988 or 2000. 191 Lewicki et al., 2006, p. 1003. 192 Şengün & Wasti, 2011. 193 Lount, 2010. 194 Lewicki et al., 2006. 195 Posten & Mussweiler, 2013.

Endnotes 196 McEvily, Perrone & Zaheer, 2003, p. 93. 197 Six & Skinner, 2010. 198 Lewicki et al., 2006, p. 1003. 199 Cho, 2006. 200 Ibid. 201 Lapidot et al., 2007. 202 Keyton & Smith, 2009. 203 Dimoka, 2010, p. 375. 204 Benbasat, Gefen & Pavlou, 2010. 205 Benbasat et al., 2010. 206 Becker, Cropanzano & Sanfey, 2011; Lee, Senior & Butler, 2012. 207 Lee et al., 2012. 208 Becker et al., 2011, p. 955. 209 Fichman, 2003. 210 Dimoka, 2010. 211 Holtz, 2013. 212 Ibid. 213 Ibid. 214 Engell, Haxby & Todorov, 2007. 215 Engell et al., 2007, p. 1515. 216 Todorov, Pakrashi & Oosterhof, 2009. 217 Murnighan, 2010. 218 Ibid., p. 64. 219 Huang & Murnighan, 2010, p. 68. 220 Huang & Murnighan, 2010. 221 Holtz, 2013. 222 Todorov et al., 2009. 223 Said, Baron & Todorov, 2009. 224 Said et al., 2009. 225 Riedl, Hubert & Kenning, 2010, p. 397. 226 Benbasat et al., 2010. 227 Becker et al., 2011. 228 Li and Tan, 2013. 229 Ibid. 230 Kramer & Lewicki, 2010. 231 Ibid., p. 252. 232 Mayer et al., 1995. 233 Tomlinson & Mayer, 2009, p. 87. 234 Kramer and Lewicki, 2010. 235 Mayer et al., 1995. 236 Dirks, Lewicki & Zaheer, 2009, p. 69. 237 Dirks et al., 2009. 238 Dirks et al., 2009; Kramer & Lewicki, 2010. 239 Kramer & Lewicki, 2010. 240 Kim, Dirks & Cooper, 2009. 241 Kim et al., 2009. 242 Desmet, De Cremer & Van Dijk, 2011.

243 Dirks et al., 2009, Kramer & Lewicki, 2010. 244 Dirks et al., 2009. 245 Ibid. 246 Ibid., p. 72. 247 Kramer & Lewicki, 2010. 248 Kramer & Lewicki, 2010, p. 252. 249 Ibid. 250 Dirks et al., 2009; Tomlinson, Dineen & Lewicki, 2004. 251 Tomlinson, 2011. 252 Ibid. 253 Kramer & Lewicki, 2010. 254 Kim et al., 2009. 255 Dirks, Kim, Ferrin & Cooper, 2011, p. 89. 256 Ibid., p. 101. 257 Dirks et al., 2011. 258 Kim, Cooper, Dirks & Ferrin, 2013. 259 Kim et al., 2013. 260 Ferrin, Kim, Cooper & Dirks, 2007. 261 Ferrin et al., 2000. 262 Galagan, 2009. 263 Dietz, 2011. 264 Six, Nooteboom & Hoogendoorn, 2010. 265 Six et al., 2010, p. 291. 266 Six et al., 2010. 267 Ibid. 268 Lapidot et al., 2007. 269 Zeffane & Connel, 2003. 270 Zeffane & Connel, 2003, p. 8. 271 Ibid. 272 Edelman, 2014. 273 Kramer & Lewicki, 2010, p. 249. 274 Kramer & Lewicki, 2010. 275 Ibid., p. 269. 276 Ibid., p. 259. 277 Lewicki & Bunker, 1996. 278 Kramer & Lewicki, 2010, p. 261. 279 Kramer, 1999. 280 Kramer & Lewicki, 2010. 281 Ibid., p. 265. 282 Von der Ohe & Van der Walt, 1988. 283 Six et al., 2010. 284 Gillespie & Dietz, 2009. 285 Ibid. 286 Ibid., p. 134. 287 Gillespie & Dietz, 2009. 288 Ibid. 289 Bachmann, 2011.

181

Employee engagement in a South African context 290 Bachmann, 2011; Bachmann & Inkpen, 2011. 291 Ghani & Hussin, 2009. 292 Ibid. 293 Gill, 1996. 294 Ibid., p. 33. 295 Gill, 1996. 296 Nguyen & Rose, 2009. 297 Ghani & Hussin, 2009. 298 Whitener, Brodt, Korsgaard & Werner, 1998. 299 Whitener et al., 1998. 300 Cho & Ringquist, 2011. 301 Whitener et al., 1998. 302 Ibid. 303 Korsgaard, Brodt & Whitener, 2002. 304 Norman, Avolio & Luthans, 2010. 305 Norman et al., 2010. 306 Ghani & Hussin, 2009. 307 Martins, 2000. 308 Mayer et al., 1995. 309 Lin, 2010, p. 528.

Chapter 6 Endnotes 1 Hofstede, 2005. 2 Hayes, 2011. 3 Trompenaars, 1997. 4 Graves, 1974. 5 Beck, 2013. 6 Laubscher, 2014. 7 Laubscher & the author, 2105. 8 Viljoen, 2008. 9 Hofstede, 2005. 10 Brewer & Venaik, 2014. 11 Ibid. 12 House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorman & Gupta, 2004. 13 Ibid. 14 Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 1997. 15 Ibid. 16 Graves, 1972; Beck, 2013. 17 Viljoen & Laubscher, 2015. 18 Beck, 2013. 19 Laubscher, 2014. 20 Beck, 2013. 21 Laubscher, 2012. 22 Ibid. 23 Beck, 1996. 24 Graves, 1974.

182

25 Laubscher, 2013. 26 Viljoen & Laubscher, 2015. 27 Laubscher, 2013. 28 Viljoen & Laubscher, 2015. 29 Laubscher, 2013. 30 Ibid. 31 Ibid. 32 Ibid. 33 Viljoen, 2014. 34 Laubscher, 2013. 35 Beck, 2013. 36 Laubscher, 2013. 37 Viljoen, 2014. 38 Laubscher, 2013. 39 Viljoen, 2015. 40 Beck, 2013. 41 Laubscher, 2015. 42 Viljoen, 2014. 43 BeQ Accreditation Manual, 2015. 44 Viljoen, 2014. 45 BeQ Accreditation Manual, 2015. 46 Viljoen, 2013. 47 Laubscher, 2013. 48 Viljoen, 2014. 49 BeQ Accreditation Manual, 2015. 50 BeQ Accreditation Manual, 2009. 51 Viljoen, 2008. 52 Viljoen, 2014. 53 BeQ Accreditation Manual, 2015. 54 Viljoen, 2015. 55 BeQ Training Manual, 2015. 56 Ibid. 57 Merriam Webster Dictionary, 2015. 58 BeQ Accreditation Manual, 2015. 59 Viljoen, 2015. 60 Jackson, 2004. 61 Bateman & Bobbett, 2001. 62 Lessem & Nussbaum, 1996. 63 Lessem, 1993. 64 DePree, 1989. 65 Jung, Von Franz, Henderson, Jacobi & Jaffe, 1978. 66 Christie, Lessem & Mbigi, 1994. 67 Hofstede, 1980. 68 Sagiv & Schwartz, 2000. 69 Cilliers & May, 2002. 70 Rogers, 1982. 71 BeQ Report, 2013.

Endnotes 72 Laubscher, 2013. 73 BeQ Report, 2011. 74 Laubscher, 2013. 75 Viljoen, 2015. 76 BeQ Report, 2013. 77 BeQ Report, 2014. 78 BeQ Report, 2013. 79 Ibid.

Chapter 7 Endnotes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Schutte, 2003; Viljoen, 2014. Muswaka, 2014.

Summers, 1982. Muswaka, 2014. Kluge, 2011. Hans-Bockler-Stiftung, 2011. Prenting, 1992. Hans Bockler-Stiftung, 2011, pg. 11. Co-determination Act of 1976. Summers, 1982. Muswaka, 2014. Federal Ministry for Employment and Social Order, 1995, pp. 5–8. 13 Works Constitution Act, 1972. 14 Prenting, 1992. 15 Ibid. 16 Muswaka, 2014. 17 Prenting, 1992. 18 Muswaka, 2014. 19 Prenting, 1992. 20 Ibid. 21 Muswaka, 2014. 22 Kluge, 2014. 23 Prenting, 1992, p. 2. 24 Prenting, 1992. 25 Webster & Macun, 2009. 26 Ibid. 27 Kluge, 2014. 28 Prenting, 1992. 29 Ibid. 30 Webster & Macun, 2009. 31 Ministry of Labour, 1994. 32 Ministry of Labour, 1994. 33 Webster & Macun, 2009. 34 Ibid. 35 Macun, 2009. 36 Buhlungu, 1999.

37 Webster & Macun, 2009. 38 Ibid. 39 Ibid. 40 Ibid. 41 Pateman, 1971. 42 Webster & Macun, 2009. 43 Rogers & Streeck, quoted by Webster & Macun, 2009. 44 Maller, 1992, quoted by Webster & Macun, 2009. 45 Veldsman & Harilall, 1996. 46 Webster & Macun, 2009. 47 Veldsman & Harilall, 1992. 48 Muswaka, 2014. 49 Ibid. 50 Buhlungu, 1999. 51 Ibid. 52 Ibid. 53 Von Holdt (forthcoming) quoted by Buhlungu, 1999. 54 Buhlungu, 1992. 55 Cressey & MacInnes, 1980. 56 Muswaka, 2014. 57 Ibid. 58 Ibid. 59 Ibid., p. 142. 60 Muswaka, 2014. 61 Ibid., p. 146. 62 Webster & Macun, 2009. 63 Mandala Consulting, 1999. 64 Kaplan & Norton, 2006. 65 Jung, 1953. 66 Ackoff, 2003. 67 University of Nebraska, 1998. 68 Viljoen, 2015. 69 Laubscher, 2012. 70 Cooperrider, 2003. 71 Viljoen, 2008. 72 Ibid. 73 Laubscher & VIljoen, 2014.s 74 Laubscher, 2012.

183

Employee engagement in a South African context

INDEX A ability, benevolence and integrity (ABI), 70, 71, 74, 75, 77, 81, 83, 84, 90, 97, 98 Aboriginals, 124 Absa, 35 absorption, 4, 6, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 20, 23, 24, 54, 56, 58–61 academics, 3, 4, 21, 26, 28, 70 act, 17, 23, 42, 43, 46, 48, 72, 74, 78, 84, 90, 93, 96, 112, 117 affective, 54, 56, 104 Africa, 106, 116–117, 123 agreements, collective, 129, 147, 148 alignment, 7, 113, 115, 135, 140, 142 alliances, 85 aloofness, 48 altruistic, 103 American Heritage, 46, 47 amygdala, 88, 89 ancestors, 125 antecedents, 4, 7, 18, 57, 60, 69, 71, 74, 76, 78, 81, 82, 94, 96, 99 influence engagement, 55 apartheid workplace regime, 134 apathy, 41, 47 application, 1–3, 50, 101, 105, 106, 119, 127, 136 approach engagement results, 46 approaches, 1, 3, 4, 5, 31, 76, 101, 102, 104, 109, 122, 126, 127 systemic, 42 archetypes, 42, 45, 101, 107 assertiveness, 102, 103, 119 assets, 27, 120 attitudes, 19, 20, 26, 27, 72 employee’s, 19 attributions, 91–92, 94 Australia, 101, 113–114, 123, 124, 126 autonomy, 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 25, 31, 54, 56, 58, 60, 62 availability, 5, 9, 10, 15, 23, 55, 57, 105 B balance, work-life, 53 behavioural change, 48, 90

184

Beige, 105, 106, 150 Beige people, 106, 108 beliefs, 10, 15, 42, 48, 72, 73, 75, 77, 78, 81, 84, 115, 116, 125 employee’s, 77 workplace-relevant, 72 Benchmark of Engagement Model, 44 Benchmark of Engagement Questionnaire (BeQ) 34, 43–44, 48, 49, 51, 101, 102, 103, 104, 106, 109, 110, 111, 115, 143 enquiry, 45, 102, 111 framework, 45 philosophy, 44, 48, 49, 101, 104, 116, 126 story of IBL, 143 benevolence, 70, 71, 74, 77, 78, 81, 83, 87, 92, 97 Big Five, 79, 81 Blue and Orange organisational initiatives, 126 Blue employees, 107, 110 Blue people, 107, 108 Blue thinking structures, 107 board, 129, 130, 131, 134, 145 board structure entrusts, 134 brain, 87, 88 brain areas, 87, 89 breakdowns, 83, 90, 91, 139, 143 burnout, 1, 6, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 23, 60, 61, 62 dimensions, 6, 13 bus drivers, 127, 139, 140, 146 buses, 122, 135–136, 139 business, 29, 37, 39, 42, 54, 95, 103, 117, 120, 124, 143 indicators, 41, 43, 47, 48, 52, 123, 126, 127, 139 leaders, 37, 101, 109, 125 people, 63 bus service, 136 C capacity, 1, 33, 96, 127, 150 psychological, 1–2 capital, 128–129 human, 2, 21, 28, 43 career advancement, 16 chairperson, 130, 134, 135 change consultants, 137

Index Chartered Institute of Personnel Development. (CIPD) 21, 25, 28, 54 Chief Executive Officer (CEO), 21, 23, 26, 30, 31, 66, 115, 134, 137, 139, 142, 149 Chief Operating Officer (COO), 142 children, 124, 145 China, 70, 101, 125, 126 Chinese employees, 125 climate, healthy organisational, 19 co-determination, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 146, 149, 150 Act, 128, 129 process, 131, 147 co-determination strategy, 127, 148, 149 progressive, 147 colleagues, 10, 12, 14, 15, 64, 76, 80 collective bargaining, 132 colour code, 106 colours, 106, 107 column, 106 commitment, 4, 7, 12, 43, 46, 56, 84 communication, 25, 31, 39, 65, 74, 90, 98, 105–106, 109, 132, 147 community, 75, 96, 106, 108, 110, 134, 138, 145 Companies Act, 135 company, 33, 34, 127, 128, 129, 130, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 143, 145, 146 decisions, 128, 129 level, 129, 130 performance, 59, 147 work, 42, 46 comparative results, 63, 64 competence, 17, 27–30, 32, 44, 74, 78, 84, 87 right, 28, 29 competitive advantage, 2, 21, 27, 28, 29, 32, 54, 55, 85 dimensions of, 27 competitors, 27, 29, 136 complaints, 39, 122, 130 complexity, 29, 73, 101 components, 7, 14, 53, 63, 74, 78, 79, 96 behavioural, 7 main, 74, 75, 77 organisational system, 96 Comprehensive Burnout Engagement (COBE), 14 concept, 2, 3, 4, 12, 13, 22, 25, 26, 41–42, 50, 72, 73, 74, 122, 128

conceptualisations, 2, 3, 22, 23, 24, 34, 57, 74, 82, 112, 127 conceptual model, 8, 15, 82 conceptual unified trust model, 81, 99 conditions, 9, 11, 17–19, 23, 48, 73, 95, 109, 111, 114, 127, 130 work environments linking, 60 working, 15, 55, 129 Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), 56, 58, 59, 63 conflicts, work–family, 20 congruence, 43, 52, 97, 114, 115, 135 congruent, 25, 26, 31, 37, 45, 46, 52, 78, 101, 108, 114, 116, 145 connection, 5, 26, 48, 59, 85, 113 conscientiousness, 7, 56, 58, 79, 81 constructs, 3, 4, 6, 7, 14, 15, 34, 44, 45, 48, 50, 62, 110, 111, 112 distinct, 86, 87 drive engagement, 111 consultants, 36, 40, 49, 123, 125 consultation, 131, 132, 133 context, 23, 25, 31, 33, 43, 45, 78, 80, 83, 90, 92, 101, 102, 104, 105 over-cultural, 46 continuum, 13, 86 trust–distrust, 89 contractors, 117–118, 122 contribution, 5, 25, 26, 96, 110, 129, 143, 144 control, 13, 16, 17, 71, 72, 77, 84, 98, 104, 106, 129, 134 conversation, 36, 40, 51, 52, 148 conservation of resources (COR) 17 co-operation, 128, 129, 133 corporate governance system, 134, 135 cost savings, 127, 149 countries, 34, 35, 37, 41, 44, 52, 61, 66, 70, 102, 103, 112, 117, 120, 123 co-workers, 9, 69, 77, 83 credibility, 52, 74, 79, 80, 81, 87 cultural backgrounds, 76, 77 cultural dynamics, 35, 37 national, 102, 103, 111 culture, 33, 35, 37, 38, 40, 44, 46, 49, 102, 103, 105, 121, 126, 137, 139 national, 101, 102, 103, 104 cynicism, 6, 11, 13–14, 49, 62, 71

185

Employee engagement in a South African context

186

D

E

dark side, 84, 85 data, qualitative, 38, 39, 50 databases, 54, 63 decisions, 73, 98, 105–106, 119, 128, 131 dedication, 4, 6, 12–14, 16, 24, 56, 58, 60, 61 dedication and absorption, 4, 6, 11, 12, 20, 58, 59 degree, 12, 23, 26, 27, 66, 78, 85, 102, 103, 112, 114 demands, 6, 10, 15, 128 demographic group, 64, 65 departmental report, 40 departments, 39, 40, 51, 112, 123, 139, 140, 141, 145 description, 23, 27, 33, 102, 103, 104 design, 41, 76, 119, 121 design principles, 51, 52 detachment, 48 development, 14, 15, 16, 25, 34, 36, 53, 59, 62, 76, 79, 101, 119, 143, 146 difference, 25, 39, 53, 65, 70, 118, 124 dimension measures, 80 dimensions, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 27, 30, 61, 62, 63, 64, 66, 80, 83, 103 dimensions of engagement, 12, 30 directors, 121, 134, 135 disciplinary, 147, 148 disengage, 9, 25, 26, 55 disengagement, 4, 8, 9, 14, 15, 23, 41, 45 personal, 5 disengagement absenteeism staff, 47 display group dynamics, 141 distrust, 70, 74, 76, 85–88 diversity, 37, 40, 139, 140 domains, 45, 46, 78, 111, 114, 115 duties, 23, 25, 26 dynamics, 33, 35, 36, 37, 44, 46, 102, 110, 112, 113, 114, 115, 119, 125, 126 diversity, 117, 119, 139 high-performance teaming, 111 inter-organisational, 119 multi-cultural, 36, 37, 39, 101, 104 social system, 135 social systemic, 41 spiral, 36, 101, 104, 105, 143 unique people, 102 dysfunctional side, 84

economies, emerging, 43, 105, 107, 108, 127 effectiveness, 27, 92 perceived, 98 effects negative, 48, 85 positive work, 12 elders, 50, 105, 106, 107, 110, 124 electricity, 65, 66 emotional engagement, 59 emotional intelligence theory, 118, 119 emotions, 24, 47, 89, 90 empirical validation of burnout and engagement, 13 employee category, 66 employee consultation, 128 employee engagement, 1–4, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20, 53, 54, 66, 69, 71 component, 14, 45 concept, 8 high, 18 linked, 2 measure, 7, 59, 62 outcomes of, 18, 19 predicting, 16 states of, 5 stimulate, 19 underpinning, 8 employee involvement, 133 initiatives, 133 employee learning, 25 employee participation, 128 employee performance, 12, 60 employee representation, 131, 132 employee representatives, 130 monitor, 130 employees, 6, 10, 12–21, 25, 29, 31, 40, 53, 66, 69, 82–85, 97, 129, 130, 131–137 company’s, 70 disengaged, 8 frustrate, 25 full-time, 117 individual, 2, 9, 17, 19, 20, 23, 25, 31, 64, 97, 129 measuring, 53 motivated, 82 relationships, 4 securing, 29 senior, 118

Index situation, 17 transferring, 130 trusted, 96 unionised, 149 university, 11 ascribe, 6 satisfaction, 47 direction, 66 drive, 12 experience, 4, 25 questions, 38 strikes, 136 trust, 80, 143 surveys, 56 voice, 85 training, 130 turnover, 48 employers, 28, 95, 96, 129, 130, 131, 132, 136, 145 employment, 9, 25, 129, 130 enablers, 138–139, 144 energy, 6, 8, 13, 16, 17, 19, 20, 24, 42, 46, 48, 107, 108, 112, 121 feelings of, 54, 56 high levels of, 11–12, 14, 24 engaged employees, 2, 6, 8, 12, 19, 20, 32, 69 engaged leadership team, 59 engaged people, 22 engagement, 1–26, 30, 32, 34, 41, 42, 43, 45–48, 53, 54, 56–58, 69, 101, 127, 143 approaches contextualise, 5 associated, 3 authors portray, 24 behavioural, 7, 54, 55, 56, 59, 69 benchmark of, 124, 148 characterises, 11 conceptualise, 4, 23, 41 conceptualised, 21 drive, 111 drivers of, 14, 108 effective, 7 enhancing, 123 enquiries, 49 excessive, 20 facets of, 30, 56 factors, 35, 109, 117 framework, 54 high levels of, 52, 135 illuminating, 21

improving, 3 in multi-cultural environments, 33 increased, 69 individual, 8, 34, 42 influence, 24 initiatives, 127, 148 instrument, 39 job, 7 levels of, 14, 20, 43, 44, 46, 47, 63, 66, 67, 109, 110, 116, 123, 140, 143 leverage, 26, 31 low levels of, 66 manifests, 104 meaning of, 7 measurement of, 38, 54 measuring, 59, 62 model, 44 optimise, 52 organisational, 7, 43 phenomenon of, 35, 37 position, 11 positions, 3 process, 121 questionnaire, 34, 101 research, 23, 34 strategies, 149 studied, 23 study research, 123 study results, interpreting, 103, 104 study work, 126 support, 25 survey results, 39 surveys, 30, 66, 67 theoretical concepts underpinning, 53 trait, 54, 56 transformational strategy, 118, 120, 121, 126 treated, 3 unleashes, 52 work, 127 engagement and human niches, 108 engagement dynamics, 51, 110, 116, 123 individual, 104 engagement studies, 38, 39, 40, 41, 102, 109, 116, 118, 120, 121, 125, 137, 139, 140, 142 conduct, 34 initial, 137 Interstate Bus Lines, 137 enquiry, 34, 37, 39, 50, 51

187

Employee engagement in a South African context enterprise, 128, 130 enthusiasm, 3, 6, 11–13, 24, 47, 54 environment, 26, 28, 31, 32, 33, 48, 50, 63, 64, 73, 95, 102, 104, 112, 116 external, 17, 26, 29, 106 working, 15 environmental interest groups, 97 equilibrium, 86, 91 social, 91, 92 establishment, 128, 129, 130, 132 evidence, 1, 11, 16, 53, 58, 59, 63, 85, 86–89, 143, 149 examples of tactics, 92 exchanges negative, 91 positive, 91, 92 Exco, 118, 148 exhaustion, 6, 11, 13–16 emotional, 4, 15, 60, 62 expectations, 25, 28, 38, 72, 74–75, 77, 96, 115, 118, 120 positive, 72, 74, 75, 86, 91, 96 experiences, 1, 10, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 25–27, 49, 54, 87, 97, 115, 117 employee’s work, 20 short-term peak, 13 work-related, 19 exploitation, 85, 96 extent, 3, 7, 9, 11, 12, 16, 17, 71, 78, 102, 103, 111, 125 F facilitator, 40, 50, 51, 119 factor analysis, exploratory, 58, 59 failure, 9, 17, 93, 96, 115, 133 organisation-level, 96 fear, 9, 51, 86, 87, 89 feedback, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 51, 52, 58, 66, 97, 115, 119, 121, 123, 124 findings, 14, 48, 75, 84, 87, 88, 89, 124, 139 fit work-role, 10, 57 work–role, 9 Five-Factor Model of personality structure, 71 flow, 1, 4, 13, 22 focus groups, 35, 50, 90 followers, 98

188

foreigners, 121, 125 formula, 111, 112–115 formulae, 111, 112, 113 formula studies, 112, 114 framework, 14, 54–55, 69, 75, 81 theoretical, 1–2, 5, 8, 21, 56, 81 fundamentalist Muslim workers, 36 G Gallup Research Group, 3, 6 Gallup Workplace Audit, 7 general manager (GM), 26, 80, 121, 122 generations, 28 younger, 28 German corporate governance system, 133, 134 German system, 134 German works councils, 135 Germany, 128, 129, 130, 132, 133, 135 Ghana, 41, 101, 113, 114, 120, 123, 126 Ghanaian organisation, 113 Ghanaians, 121, 122 Ghani, 97, 98 global leadership and organisational behavior effectiveness, 103 globe studies, 101, 103 goal achievement, 21, 25, 26, 32 goals, 14, 16, 21, 32, 33, 54, 55, 71, 96, 120 challenging, 83 strategic, 145 working, 15 governance, external, 96, 97 government institutions, 65, 66 governments, 70, 93, 121, 136 Green people, 108 group, 36, 37, 40, 44, 45, 50, 51, 93, 110, 114, 118, 122, 123, 124, 126 dynamics, 43, 55, 114, 141 effort, 42, 46 levels, 5, 128 members, 36, 51, 119, 122, 147 work, 125 growth, 19, 21, 108, 131 personal, 9, 15, 16 H health, 12, 18, 19, 53, 108

Index helping healthy people, 1 hierarchical levels, 28, 30, 32 high distrust, 86 equal, 86 high engagement levels, 66 high trust denies, 85 high-trust relationship, 94 high workload, 144 highly untrustworthy, 89 Hofstede, 102, 103, 117 dimensions, 102 home, 9, 17, 117, 120, 122, 149 human energy, 33, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 49, 110, 114, 139, 145, 149, 150 levels of, 43, 143 human niches, 37, 49, 52, 101, 104, 105, 108, 109, 110, 135, 143, 145, 149 Human Resources Management, 95 Human resource strategies and aligned practices, 148 humans, 73, 88, 89 trusted, 36 I IBL, leadership of, 127, 139 IBL (Interstate Bus Lines), 110, 127, 135, 136, 137, 138, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148–150 IBL Newsletter, 149 identification, 13, 14, 47 I-engagement formula, 114 ill health, 61 impacts BeQ subconstructs, 116 implementation, 29, 30, 63, 64, 66, 91, 127, 135, 146 implications, 37, 44, 78, 84, 87, 88, 111, 117, 127, 149 incentives, 23, 39, 91, 92, 142 inclusion, 41, 74, 113, 125 climate of, 41 culture of, 41, 42 inclusive engagement strategy, 139, 148 inclusive organisational development, 123 inclusive organisational transformation, 34, 39, 111 inclusivity, 38, 41, 42, 43, 47, 48, 51, 52, 101, 108, 135, 149 indicators, 26, 112

indifference, 42, 45, 47, 48 individuals, 1, 5, 6, 14, 15, 17, 24, 40, 49, 71, 76, 77, 91, 103, 118 individual work-related behaviour, improved, 71 industries, 29, 35, 40, 43, 63, 67, 131, 149 influence organisational engagement, 44 influence trusting behaviour, 88 information, 27, 29, 30, 70, 71, 79, 80, 81, 82, 96, 97, 98, 114, 115, 132 sources, 80 inform organisational strategy, 109 initiatives, 34, 111, 140, 141 strategic, 33, 145 support organisational transformational, 140 inputs, 31, 51, 97 instruments, 6, 34, 53, 79, 122, 136 sensitive, 34, 43 study/measuring, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62 validating engagement measurement, 56, 58 integrity, 25, 59, 70, 71, 74, 77, 78, 81, 93, 94, 97, 98 intention, 3, 20, 39, 72, 80, 139 trusting, 75 interaction hypothesis, 17 interdependence, 73 interests, 2, 3, 12, 36, 47, 79, 82, 110, 129, 130, 131, 133, 134 International Journal of Human Resources Management, 95 inter-organisational level, 85 interpersonal relations, 86 interplay, 43, 45, 48, 75, 110, 112 systemic, 43, 45, 126 Interstate Bus Lines. See IBL Interstate Bus Lines Organisational BeQ results, 144 interventions, 35, 37, 39, 40, 45, 97, 114, 116, 118, 119, 126, 127, 139, 140, 141–142 interviews, 35, 50, 90, 137, 149 intra-organisational level, 85 intra-organisational literature, 74 investment, 9, 10, 17, 19, 43, 111, 136, 149 involvement, 6, 7, 8, 13, 22, 43, 54, 56, 129 worker, 131 items, 7, 14, 58, 62, 80, 94 J JD–R model, 14, 15, 16

189

Employee engagement in a South African context job demands, 11, 14, 15, 16–18, 61 enrichment, 57 high, 11, 17, 61 insecurity, 11 involvement, 3, 4, 7, 12–13 resources model, 14 satisfaction, 2, 3, 4, 7, 19–20, 57, 59, 87 job resources, 11, 14–18 effects of, 61 jobs, 2, 4–5, 8, 10, 11, 12–13, 15, 16–18, 20, 31, 32, 59, 64, 82, 128 joint action planning, 36, 140, 148 joint forums, 133 journey, emotional intelligence, 118, 119 K Kahn’s description of engagement, 22 key findings, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62 knowledge, 2, 17, 27, 28, 29, 71, 73, 74, 83, 95–96, 102 L labour, 128, 131, 132, 134 Labour Relations Act (LRA), 131, 132, 134 leaders, 36, 37, 38, 52, 82, 83, 84, 96, 97, 98, 107, 110, 114, 115, 119 individual, 83 leadership, 28, 29–31, 33, 34, 38, 51, 69, 82, 83, 84, 109, 126, 143, 149, 150 managerial, 98 trusted, 150 universal, 108, 126 legislation, 128, 129, 133 liaison committees, 132, 133 life, 1, 35, 37, 38, 54, 55–56, 84, 86, 102, 107 employee’s, 13 working, 13, 104 life’s work, 104 line managers, 25, 26, 27, 30, 31, 32, 37, 69, 116 direct, 114, 125 link, 18, 25, 49, 89, 90, 95, 97 low distrust, 86 equal, 86 lowered levels of engagement, 144 low human systemic energy, 48

190

loyalty, customer, 3, 60 M main constructs, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62 management, 27–28, 31, 66, 97, 118, 120, 127, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 147, 148, 149 boards, 130, 132 decisions, 131 information, 40 levels, 64, 97 personnel, 27, 130 practices, 82, 96 senior, 65, 97 strategic, 27 trusted, 36 union forum, joint, 147, 148 worker interaction, 133 management system, 118 integrated performance, 141 management team, 119, 121, 142, 143 executive, 120 manager groups, 88 managerial practices, 69, 79–82 managerial trustworthy behaviour, 98 managers, 22, 23, 26, 28, 39, 40, 65, 66, 69, 79, 81, 82–83, 93, 98, 99 general, 26, 121, 122 immediate, 30–31, 63, 64, 66 senior, 82, 83 Mancom teams, 118, 119 Mandala Consulting, 137, 147 manifest, 14, 18, 35, 41, 46, 47, 48, 51, 52, 70, 106, 110 manufacturing, 65, 66 Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), 6 meaning, 3, 4, 9, 31, 43, 101 trustworthiness, 88 meaningfulness, 5, 9, 10, 23, 25, 55, 57 psychological, 9, 10, 23, 57 measure engagement, 55 measurement, 4, 24, 35, 54, 56, 57, 62, 87, 148 organisational climate, 74 physiological, 87, 88 mechanisms, 132, 134 institutional trust-building, 84 members, 7, 10, 22, 24, 33, 74, 95, 96, 97, 103, 130, 145

Index union, 50 metaphors, 36, 52, 107, 109, 110, 119, 124, 147 methodology, 48, 50, 52 micro-organisational, 72 middle management, 139, 140, 141, 148 mind, 11, 13, 38, 43, 99, 102, 143 work-related state of, 6, 20, 24 mining, 65, 66 mobility, 28 model, 14, 18, 53, 57, 58, 59, 61, 72, 75, 76, 79, 80–83, 85, 86, 90 theoretical, 59, 60, 62 money, 17, 41, 70, 106, 107, 120 motivation, 2, 12, 17, 18, 19, 133 intrinsic, 12, 13, 16, 22 motivational theories, 24 movements, positive psychology, 1 multi-culturalism, 34, 36 multi-cultural settings, 34, 47, 48, 52, 101, 109, 118 engagement in, 35, 101 N neuroscience, 87 nine-item scale, 56 norms, 91–92, 95, 117 O observation, 21, 23, 28, 35 observer ratings, 79 OCB (organisational citizenship behaviour), 2, 4, 54, 56, 69, 70 OCD consultants, 101, 104, 111–112 OCD intervention and engagement strategies, 149 OCD work, 127 openness, 80, 84, 98 Open-space technology works, 51 optimise group dynamics, 119 Orange employees, 110 Orange organisational initiatives, 126 order, 2, 16, 17, 18, 19, 33, 47, 75, 76, 119, 121, 124, 126, 135, 136 social, 129 organisation, 19, 24–35, 43–53, 64, 69, 83–86, 95, 96, 106, 107–108, 112, 114–121, 127, 143, 148 adaptive, 43

benefits, 85 case, 135 challenges, 119 change methodology, 49 change, 36, 137 contemporary, 28 context, 25, 71, 73, 94, 112 culture, 28, 33, 39, 49, 109, 117 domain, 52 dynamics, 37, 43, 45, 104, 126, 137, 139 efficiency constraints, 133 efficient, 70 enquiry, 109 environment, 95 factors, 23, 24, 83 goal achievement, 25, 26 group dynamics, 115 health-care, 40 information, 70 interventions, large-scale, 116 knowledge-processing, 83 leadership, 127 leadership, 64 level endeavours, 25 level trust repair, 95 levels, 22, 24, 30, 45, 54, 55, 70, 74, 80, 93, 96, 110, 116, 139 line managers, 25 managers, 23 members, 22, 25–26, 29, 72, 95 members, 8, 22, 25 multi-cultural, 113 nature, 90 neuroscience paradigm, 89 norms, 55 objectives, 98 optimal, 83 questions, 140 organisational, 16, 25, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 48, 52, 93, 101, 110, 113, 126 organogram, 37 phenomena, 88 psyche, 42, 116 psychologists, 10 psychology databases, 54 psychology, 62, 72 purpose, 32 questions, 45, 107

191

Employee engagement in a South African context radical, 42 reality, 93 representatives, 93, 96 research, 35 researcher, 102 resources, 15, 60 role, 22 satisfaction, 30, 63 sciences, 87 settings, 15, 76 side, 49 situations, 19 society’s, 103 spaces, 43 structure, 33, 130 success, 11, 119, 142 support, perceived, 84 sustainable, 149 systems, 96, 114 tasks, 52 theories, 21, 88 theory merge, 1 transformation, 45 trust relationships, 81 trust, 74, 75, 81, 99 values, 26, 31, 32, 90, 118 virtual, 71 vision, 54, 55 organisational behavior effectiveness, 103 organisational behaviour, 2, 21, 47, 89 positive, 1 organisational commitment, 2, 3, 7, 11, 12, 17, 18, 19, 30, 61, 63–64, 66 effects of job resources on, 61 organisational development, 49, 121 initiatives, 120, 137 intervention, 118 organisational development process, 48 humanistic, 118 organisational goals, 11, 17, 20, 24, 25, 26, 31 common, 96 targets support, 31 organisational outcomes, 2, 3, 16, 71 positive, 15, 18, 70 organisational performance, 2, 21, 27, 29, 31, 32, 55, 71 enhanced, 21 secure, 26, 29

192

securing, 26 organisational strategy, 107, 111, 142, 143 executing, 108 organisational table, 109, 110, 112, 114 metaphoric, 43 organisational transformational process, 140 radical, 48 organisation’s purpose, 25 orientation, 54, 102, 103 ounces, 117 outcome compromisers, 138–139, 144 outcomes, 3, 11, 18, 19, 20, 22, 57, 71, 85, 92, 110, 118, 120, 127 unexpected, 31 over-cultural dynamics, 33, 34, 41, 43, 44, 45, 49, 52, 101, 104, 106, 110, 111, 115, 117 over-culture, 33, 43, 101, 104, 109, 115, 126 overtrust, 85 P participants, 8, 36, 38, 43, 45, 48, 50, 51, 62, 111, 126 participation, 17, 38, 39, 40, 43, 45, 51, 128, 132, 134, 149 maximum, 51 participation rate, 40 participation rights, 128 parties, 23, 69, 72, 73, 74, 77, 78, 85, 86, 90 partners, 77, 85, 86 path, 69 Path-analytic framework of engagement, 57 penance, 92 people, 1, 9, 10, 38, 50, 76, 102, 106, 107–109, 116, 117, 121, 123–124, 136, 143 working, 129 people form groups, 114 people’s work behaviour, 7 people trust, 76, 83 perceivers, 91–92 perceptions, 16, 25–26, 34, 44, 45, 53, 71, 74, 77, 109–110 trustor’s, 78 performance, 18–19, 24, 26, 27, 52, 64, 66, 80, 83, 84, 85, 138, 139, 142, 144 extra-role, 18, 71 performance feedback, 14, 15, 17, 61 performance gap, 29, 31

Index performance improvement, 1–2 performance management, 139, 141, 145 performance management system, 142 personal engagement, 5, 6, 8–9, 22, 55 defined, 8 personality, 9, 71, 79, 81 manager’s, 79 personality structure, 71, 77 personality traits, 78, 79 personality type, 37, 77, 140, 141 personal resources, 14, 15, 16–18, 20 perspectives, 6, 11, 20, 55, 76, 91, 102 academic, 2, 5, 29 character-based, 82 relationship-based, 82 Peru, 113–114 Peruvian organisation, 113 phases, 39, 62–63, 73, 102, 121 phenomenon, 13, 33, 73 philosophy, 21, 48, 49 sensitive organisational research, 34 plans, 37, 122, 141, 145, 147 strategic, 145 pledging, 42, 43, 46 POB (positive organisational behaviour), 1–2 population, 36, 38, 106, 107, 117 working, 63 positive engagement dimensions, 66, 67 positive organisational behaviour (POB), 1–2 positive psychology and organisational theory merge, 1 power dynamics, 33, 115 practices, learning organisation, 111 practitioners, 2–5, 20, 21, 22, 26, 28, 29, 35, 45, 49, 52, 53, 82, 114, 116 pride, 11, 12, 13, 24, 103, 122, 145 processes, 27, 41, 42, 48, 49, 52, 53, 55, 72, 73, 74, 90, 91, 121, 122 organisation’s, 53 structural, 91 process loss of human energy, 45 production, 41, 43, 48, 111, 120, 122, 126, 132, 133, 149 productivity, 3, 7, 19, 28, 43, 47, 71, 123, 127, 137, 139 professional efficacy, 6, 14 profile, 63, 66 propensity, 71, 76, 77

high, 77 trustor’s, 77 psychological availability, 10, 23, 55, 57, 89 psychological conditions, 5, 8, 9, 10, 23, 55, 57 psychological engagement, 57 psychological safety, 9, 23, 55, 57, 69, 89, 121 psychological state, 2, 20, 72, 73, 74, 75 psychology, 1, 89 psychometrics of top management team and middle management, 148 punishment, 92, 93 Purple and Red workers, 108 Purple employees, 122, 145 Purple people, 107, 108, 143, 145 Purple thinking system, 121, 143 Q quarrying, 65, 66 questionnaires, 41, 44, 57, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 80, 111, 121, 124 R radical organisational transformation process, 48 Red people, 107, 108, 126 Red workers, 108 reform, 93 relations, 9, 10, 12, 44, 53, 57, 108 relationship repair, 90, 91 reliability, 45, 56, 74, 80, 84, 112 repair, 90, 91, 92, 93, 97 repentance, perceived, 93 representation, 128, 129, 131–133 representatives, 129, 130, 132, 135, 149 worker, 130, 132, 150 reputation, 79, 83, 97 organisation’s, 97 public, 96, 97 research, 25, 26, 34, 35, 36, 54, 55, 79, 80, 89, 91, 101, 103, 121, 122 empirical, 3, 4, 94 organisational development, 126 traditional psychological, 1 research company, 63 research team, 35, 36–37, 120, 121 resources, 10, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 23, 26, 27, 28, 30, 32, 57, 61

193

Employee engagement in a South African context availability of, 10, 19 cognitive, 4, 5 job and personal, 15, 16–18 lack of, 21, 29, 30, 61 nonstrategic human capital, 27 respect, 35, 42, 95, 98, 102, 109, 116, 122, 125, 135, 147 responses, 36, 40, 51, 111 emotional, 23 risk, 31, 39, 66, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 77, 78–79, 85, 93, 124 role, 7, 8, 16, 22, 23, 25, 27, 37, 55, 78, 82, 95, 96, 131, 134 multiple, 23 role engagement, 23 role performances, 5, 7, 8, 10, 22, 23 individual, 7 individual’s, 7 role-players, 82, 140, 142, 149 role-related tasks, 4, 5 role theory, 22, 24 rules, 40, 50, 65, 96, 104, 105, 108, 110, 124 S safety, 5, 9, 19, 23, 55, 57, 126, 143 sample group, 39, 43, 66, 102, 119, 125 sampling error, 38 satisfaction-engagement approach, 6 schemes, 133 Schneider’s definition of employee engagement, 42 scores, 6, 38, 119, 125 engagement survey, 30, 63 total emotional intelligence, 119 sectors, 66, 70 selection, 130 self-efficacy, 16, 17 self-esteem, organisational-based, 16 self-fulfilling trusting prophecies, 88 self-regard, 112, 119 senior leaders, 82 sense of significance, 11, 12, 24 service climate, 57, 60 service groups, 65 services, 25, 66, 131, 135, 136, 146 customer, 30, 63 years of, 65 session, 36, 37, 51, 118, 121, 139–140, 145, 147, 148

194

middle management teaming, 148 strategic planning, 140, 145, 148 team development, 113, 119 shareholders, 25, 96, 107, 129, 130, 131–135 shop stewards, 134, 147 situations, 8, 9, 20, 23, 30, 31, 84, 85, 91, 93, 106, 108, 120, 121, 136 skills, 2, 5, 12, 15, 17, 21, 27, 28, 31, 49, 74, 78, 88, 114 skills wheel, soft, 140–141 social exchange relationships, 69 social exchange theory, 7, 23, 24 social network, 106 social support, 14, 15, 16, 18, 61 social systems, 10, 23, 38, 103, 109, 115, 126 society, 24, 33, 102, 103, 115, 126, 135 society work, 42, 46 South African Board for People Practices (SABPP), 53 South African health-care engagement enquiry, 39 South African organisations, 21, 62, 150 South African work forums, 135 staff, 94, 117, 119 stakeholders, 25, 26, 29, 71, 96, 130, 133, 134 key, 128, 134–135 state, 5, 43, 46, 48, 55, 56, 71, 90, 132, 136 persistent work-related, 11 positive, 1, 90 state engagement, 7, 54, 56 psychological, 54 statements, 29, 30, 31, 35, 64, 66, 80, 93 lowest-ranked, 30, 64, 66 stories, 34, 36, 38, 51, 110, 111, 117, 121, 124, 126, 127 strategy, 21, 26–27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 54, 55, 63, 64, 66, 115, 127, 140, 147 career-path development, 107 organisational transformational, 112 organisational transformational turnaround, 40 value-creating, 27 strategy and implementation, 30, 63, 64, 66 strategy failure, 29, 30 strategy implementation, 29, 30, 31, 67 strategy map, 140, 145 strategy researchers, academic, 29 strategy sessions, 137 strategy-shaping process, 29 strategy translation, 123, 127, 145, 148, 149, 150

Index strategy translation session, 146 strengths, 1–2, 105, 139, 145 stress employees experience, 15 structural equation modelling, 16, 57, 58 structures, 2, 29, 81, 90, 92, 96, 105, 106, 107, 118, 125, 129, 132, 133 subordinates, 69, 79, 81, 82, 83, 85, 98 success, 19, 20, 31, 120, 128, 131, 134, 135, 143, 145 supervisors, 14, 15, 16, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 83, 84, 89, 114, 118, 138, 139 direct, 81, 83, 84, 113 trustworthy, 9 supervisory boards, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 134, 135 supervisory body, 130 survey, 30, 39–40, 63, 66, 82 global trust, 70 synthesis of engagement, 26 system, 33, 36, 43, 45, 47, 48, 49, 108, 115, 116, 127, 137, 139, 142, 143 collective, 107, 108, 124 individualistic, 107 systemic information, 39 systemic interplay of dynamics, 46 systemic results, 43, 45 T tactics, 92 Tanzania, 35, 38, 101, 116, 117, 126 Tanzanian organisation, 113 task enjoyment, 17, 18 tasks, 8, 11, 13, 15, 19, 42, 43, 51, 52, 55, 82, 118, 119, 125, 127 team, 32, 33, 36, 37, 50, 63, 64, 110, 111, 113, 114, 118, 119, 139, 141 natural, 119, 141, 148 teambuilding and strategy translation, 148 team development workshops, 141 team management, 79, 80, 81 team work, 42, 46, 66 teamwork, 25, 67, 113 test, 5, 10, 35, 48, 58, 60, 61 Thaba Nchu, 136 Thaba Nchu Transport, 135, 136 theoretical frameworks underpinning engagement, 8

thinking structures, 36, 102, 106, 107, 108, 109, 116, 123, 145 thinking systems, 101, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 135, 143, 150 archetypal, 109 collective, 107, 145 global, 108 individualistic, 107 sacrificial, 110 thinking systems function, 110 thinking systems manifest, 109 top management, 26, 64, 65, 70, 89, 119, 139, 140, 141, 147 support of, 26, 135 top management team, 140, 145, 148 trade unions, 129, 133, 134 transformational leader, 7 transformational leadership, 54, 55, 56, 58, 69 transgression, 90, 91–92 translators, 50 transport, 65, 66, 145 tri-dimensional framework of engagement, 7 trust, 25, 26, 36, 40, 49, 51, 54, 55, 56, 69–99, 113, 139, 140, 148, 149 360-degree, 80 affective, 82 antecedents of, 79, 80, 81 broadest sense, 74 broken, 96 building, 83, 94 calculative, 90 consequences of, 87, 94 co-worker, 69 damaged, 91 definition of, 72, 90 developed, 97 development of, 78, 90 dispositional, 76 employee, 71 enhancing, 93, 95 eroded, 70 excessive, 84 excess of, 85 felt, 71 general lack, 95 high, 71, 85, 86, 95 high levels of, 127, 135, 150 hinder, 93

195

Employee engagement in a South African context identification-based, 95 increased, 69 increasing, 82, 95 indirect type of, 95 institutional, 83, 97 institutional-based, 97 inter-organisational, 84 interpersonal, 78, 83, 84 intraorganisational, 96 largest effect, 70 levels of, 7, 69, 71, 79, 82, 83, 84, 97, 98, 115, 127, 139 loss of, 70, 91 low, 85, 86, 95 low levels of, 38, 138 maintaining, 69 measuring, 73, 75 models of, 72, 75, 78–79 mutual, 147 organizational, 99 outcomes of, 76, 83 physiological evidence of, 87 propensity to, 71, 76, 77 rebuild, 90, 94 relationship-based, 82 repair, 83 repairing, 93, 95 restore, 91 role-based, 96 rule-based, 96 showed, 96 study, 73 trait, 76 traits influence workplace, 79 way, 72 trust alignment adaptability, 44 trust and distrust, 85, 86, 87, 88 trust beliefs, 76 trust-building, 89 trust-building actions, 94 trust-building behaviour, 94 trust deteriorate, 42 trusted sources, 70 trustee, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77–79, 84, 85, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94 high-stakes relationships, 92 individual, 75 trust-eroding behaviour, 87

196

trust erosion, 94 trust flow, 72 trust formation, 72, 82, 88 trusting behaviours, 73, 75, 79, 84 trusting relationship, 80 trust in leadership, 82, 83, 84 trust in organisations in BRIC countries, 70 trust issues, 118, 139 trust line managers, 97 trust literature, 94 trust maintenance programmes, 89 trust management, 36, 69 trust mounts, 86 trustor, 71, 72–79, 84, 86, 87, 90, 91, 92–94, 96 violating, 92 trustor’s dependence, 92 trust people, 96 trust primacy model, 88 trust propensity, 83 trust relations, 124 trust relationship, 39, 76, 79, 80, 81, 85, 90, 92, 96, 140, 149 compromised, 40 dyadic, 95 repairing, 89 successful, 89 trust relationship audit, 79, 81 trust repair, 90, 91, 92, 93 investigated, 96 trust repair interventions, 90, 92, 96 trust research, 89 trust researchers, 74, 75 trust top management, 139, 140 trust violations, 90, 92, 93 competence-based, 93 integrity-based, 93 trust violator, 92 trustworthiness, 74, 75, 77–80, 82–83, 85, 86, 87, 88, 90, 91, 95, 96, 98, 122 components of, 76, 81 encode, 89 increased, 98 interpersonal, 84 judge, 88, 89 people’s, 88 perceived, 77, 78, 86, 89, 97 renew, 97 renewed, 97

Index trustworthiness beliefs, 75 trustworthiness dimensions, 75, 87 trustworthy faces, 89 highly, 89 Turquoise, 106, 108 Turquoise people, 108 U unavailability, 28 understanding, 7, 8, 33, 34, 35, 87, 89, 101, 102, 103, 104, 109, 114, 125, 126 shared, 29, 119, 140, 147 understanding organisational dynamics, 123 unified model of trust, 81 unified organisational trust model, 81 unions, 37, 49, 127, 129, 132, 133, 140, 146–149 unleashing, 34, 42, 44, 110 untrustworthiness, 147 perceived, 88 UWES (Utrecht Work Engagement Scale), 6, 20, 56, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62 V validation, 54, 63 validity, 7, 22, 26, 35, 45, 48, 53, 56, 63 values, 25, 27, 32, 38, 39, 42, 43, 52, 82, 89, 90, 108, 112, 115, 123 customer, 27, 32 vicious cycles, 33, 47, 48 vcious cycles of low human systemic energy, 48 vicious organisational behaviour, 39 vigour, 4, 6, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 20, 24, 56, 58–61 violation, 92, 93 violator, 93 vision, 98, 134, 140, 141 voices, 26, 40, 43, 48, 50, 51, 52, 109, 110, 112, 114, 121 individual, 44, 110, 114 vote, 50, 130, 134, 135 vulnerability, 72, 74–75, 90 W wellbeing, 1–3, 17, 18, 23, 24, 144 work-related, 61

willingness, 11, 12, 24, 29, 32, 43, 72, 75, 76, 77, 78–79, 90, 112, 125, 144 employee’s, 113 general, 76, 77 Wintershoek Wild, 140, 141 wisdom, 43, 50, 52, 116 WordNet, 46, 48 words, 3, 11, 17, 72, 74, 76, 77, 78, 86, 87, 92, 93, 95, 97, 108 key, 72 work, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11–13, 20, 22, 23, 24, 26, 55, 122 work activities, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12, 13, 15, 20 workaholicism, 20 workaholics, 12 work attitudes, 83 observed, 88 proposition, 17 work attributes, 54, 56 work conditions, 16, 55 work councils, 129, 130, 131 work council’s role, 130 work elements, 23 work engagement, 3, 4, 6, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 53, 57–58, 60–62, 83, 99 affective commitment influence, 57 enhanced, 89 low, 61 work engagement formation, 99 work engagement scale, 58 work enjoyment, 13 work environment, 11, 60, 71, 130 immediate, 133 worker participation, 128, 131 collective, 133 workers, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 48, 49, 52, 110, 120, 127, 128, 131, 133, 134 black, 132 hard, 12 local, 36, 41 lowest-paid, 70 workers trust management, 148 workforce, 111, 116, 117–118, 120, 126, 127, 131, 133, 135, 136 engaged, 43 flourishing, 8 total, 119 work forums, 131

197

Employee engagement in a South African context work goals, 15, 17 workgroups, 90 work–life balance, 28 enhanced, 28 workload, 15, 17, 62 work motivation, 9 intrinsic, 13 work performance, 31, 64, 83 active, 5 workplace, 1–3, 10, 19, 26, 27–28, 37, 42, 71, 119, 121, 122, 124, 129, 131 democratisation, 134 forums, 131, 147 level, 132 representative council, 147 satisfaction, 70 study, 142 workplace representation, 132, 133 discredited, 133 work pressure, 15 excessive, 82 work regulations, 128 work-related facts, important, 80 work-role insecurities, 10 work role performances, 8, 9 work roles, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 15, 19, 22, 24 Works Constitution Act, 128, 129 Works Council Act, 128, 130 works councils, 128, 129, 131, 132, 133 worldviews, 34, 44, 48, 101, 102, 103, 107, 108, 115, 116, 135 Y Yellow people, 108

198

ENGAGEMENT

in a South African context

A scientific approach to context-specific measurement

Employee engagement is at the forefront of business agendas as it facilitates organisational performance. Engaged employees result in delighted customers, which in turn contributes to improved financial results. The book addresses the following issues: • • •

• • •

What is “employee engagement” – different levels, ie organisational, department/team and individual? Why is employee engagement important? Measuring employee engagement; the different instruments available; the different national and international approaches in measuring employee engagement; why is it important to account for context in measuring? High-level overview of the Nienaber and Martins employee engagement framework and measurement instrument (including trust) The current state of employee engagement in SA Engagement and related human resource concepts/constructs (eg organisational culture, commitment, citizen behaviour).

Major features that make this book unique: The book explores a scientific approach to context-specific measurement. It focuses on both the theoretical aspects of employee engagement and as well as the latest South African research.

Hester Nienaber and Nico Martins

• •

EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT in a South African context

EMPLOYEE

EMPLOYEE

ENGAGEMENT

in a South African context

Edited by Hester Nienaber and Nico Martins