Employee Engagement

A study of employee engagement at Topazs

South Dublin Region Service Stations

By

Robert Knight

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment

of the requirements of the Masters in Human

Resource Management

Research Supervisor: Colin Whitston

Presented to the National College of Ireland

August 2011
 Abstract

This dissertation is attempting to delve into the prevailing attitudes and employee

engagement within Topaz South Dublin service stations. The importance of employee

engagement is highlighted in relation to the concept of Human Capital Management. The data

collection was based on a survey which was carried out by the CIPD (2006) on employee

engagement in the UK.

The researcher seeks to understand aspects of working life at the Topaz service stations

within the South Dublin catchment area. Aspects such as meaningfulness of tasks within the

role, aspects of feelings towards the role, individual perceived performance levels, the

amount of effort given by employees and the level of employee satisfaction with aspects such

as working environment, co-workers and management. The dissertation aims to measure

engagement and look at the areas where management interventions can be implemented to

increase the overall level of employee engagement.

 Declaration

I declare that this piece of research is entirely my own work and all research was conducted

ethically.

Signed: _________________________________ Date:______________________

 Acknowledgements

The researcher would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the assistance and support

that has been received from the faculty at the National College of Ireland, in particular Colin

Whitston.

The researcher would also like to thank Karl Thompson, the area manager for Topaz South

Dublin and Ruta Ciutiene for her help and support during the research process.
 Contents

Chapter Page No.

Chapter 1

Introduction 1

Chapter 2 - Literature Review

Why Employee Engagement is of importance and interest? 3

Engagement Definition 5
The context for analysing the employee engagement phenomenon 8
Human Capital Management 11
Disengagement 11
Engagement and the Psychological States 12
Consequences of Engagement 16
Employee Engagement-Cultural, Economic & Occupational Contexts 18
Engagement Models 20
Conclusion 24

Chapter 3
Research Aims & Objectives 26

Chapter 4 -Methodology Section

Introduction 28
Survey Design 30
Details on the sections of the survey 31
Your Working Life 31
Your Employer 32
Your Job 32
Job Satisfaction 32
Leadership and Management 33
Communication at Topaz 33
The Future 33
Scales 33
Administration of the survey 34
Data Analysis 34
General Overview of Respondents 34
Engagement 35

Chapter 5 -Findings, Analysis & Discussion

Overall Engagement 37

Cognitive Engagement 38
Emotional Engagement 39
Physical Engagement 40

Engagement by Gender 41

Engagement by Age 43

Advocacy 45

Managerial Engagement 47
Work/Life Balance 48
Management & Leadership 49
Communication 52
Participation in Communications 54
Attitudes to Work 54
Meaningfulness 55
Job Satisfaction 56
Experiences of Stress and Pressure 60
Control 61
Emotional Responses To Work 62
Looking forward to Work 63
Emotions experienced by respondents over the last few weeks 64
Opinions on Working for Topaz 65
Loyalty 66
Individual Performance 66
Outcomes 67
Intentions to Quit 68

Chapter 6 -Findings & Management Implications

Introduction 70
Managerial Engagement 70
Work / Life Balance 71
Management & Leadership 71
Communications 72
Meaningfulness 72
Job Satisfaction 72
Stress and Pressure in the Workplace 73
Control 74
Opinions on working for Topaz and Loyalty 74
Intentions to Quit 74

Chapter 7

Conclusion 76
Further Research 77
Bibliography 79

Appendices
Appendix 1.0 - Engagement By Ages Detailed Breakdown 86
Appendix 2.0 -Management Engagement Levels Breakdown 88
Appendix 3.0 - Employee Engagement Survey and Cover Letter 90
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Employee engagement, according to the Corporate Executive Board (2004) is the

extent to which an employee commits to something or someone in the organisation

and how long they stay as a result of their commitment.

The main focus of this dissertation is an evaluation and measurement of employee

engagement. Employee engagement is defined by Kahn as the harnessing of

organisational members selves to their work roles; in engagement, people employ

and express themselves physically, cognitively and emotionally during role

performances (Kahn, W.A. 1990). Within the literature review the researcher

reviewed academic as well as practitioner research relating to the subject matter of

employee engagement. The researcher, in completion of the dissertation, utilised

peer review journals, as well as internet searches in order to find up to date

practitioner publications on employee engagement.

The context of the dissertation was based within the service stations of Topaz, which

fall under the South Dublin catchment area. Topaz has been present in the Irish

petrol service station market for the last 3 years. It took a foothold in the Irish market

by acquiring and subsequently merging Statoil and Shell service stations, which

through their re-branding of the acquired service stations, gave them a country wide

presence in a matter of months.

In order to collect the data to complete the dissertation, the researcher personally

distributed employee engagement surveys to the assigned service stations. The

survey is based on a report which was carried out by the CIPD in 2006, which

1
attempted to measure the levels and drivers of employee engagement in the UK. The

results from the CIPD (2006) report were used as a benchmark by the researcher in

analysing the results from the data collection.

The dissertation looked at employee engagement and how its component parts

cognitive, physical and emotional engagement measure up across the different

sections of employees. The employee groupings are as follows: sales assistant,

supervisor, assistant manager and manager.

2
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

Why Employee Engagement is of importance and interest?

Employee engagement has become a heavily discussed topic in recent years.

However, there is still ambiguity within the academic literature as to how employee

engagement can be influenced by management. There has been significant interest in

employee engagement, but this has been coupled with a good deal of

misunderstanding. According to Kular et al (2008), this misunderstanding can be

partly attributed to the fact that there is no definitive definition, resulting in

engagement being operationalised and subsequently measured in varying ways.

From a HR perspective today, engagement continues to be an important

consideration. Due to the challenging economic climate, organisations now more

than ever are deciding to restructure and resize, which has resulted in organisations

investigating new approaches to maintain and increase engagement. Organisations

fight to recruit and train their talent, so they need to do their best to keep hold of it.

Organisations need to strike the right balance between fostering and enhancing

employee engagement levels while at the same time not compromising their

competitive position.

The connection between the attitudes and behaviours of employees and the link to

the organisations bottom line was first successfully displayed 19 years ago by US

retail company Sears. Sears advocated employee engagement in the form of the

employee-customer-profit chain. The results which Sears attained from this

initiative were astounding. In one year, Sears transformed its biggest loss making

3
division (merchandising) from a $3bn loss to the company into a $752m revenue

generating division (De Vita, 2007).

As a result of the immense impact employee engagement had on Sears, HR

consultancy firms began to work with organisations to develop metrics in order to

quantify employee attitudes and behaviours and there resulting impact on customer

satisfaction and organisational performance. According to Jim Crawly, a principle at

HR research and consultancy company Towers Perrin, while previously anyone

would intuitively have said there is a link between people being well disposed

towards an organisation and the likelihood of that organisation being successful, now

there is evidence to prove it (De Vita, 2007).

In December 2004, the Harvard Business Review released the results of a survey

carried out by the Corporate Leadership Council (CLC), which involved the

compiling of 50,000 employee engagement surveys in more than 59 countries

worldwide. One of the main findings from the study was that increased commitment

can result in a 57% improvement in discretionary effort displayed by employees.

According to Buchanan (2004) the increased discretionary effort displayed by

employees produced on average, a 20% increase in individual performance and an

87% reduction in desire to leave the organisation.

According to Sirota, Mischkind & Meltzer (2005), from the analysis of their research

on employee attitudes, which was based on never before-published case studies and

data from 920,000 employees from 28 multinational companies over four years,

resulted in the generation of hard data to prove that the share price of organisations

with highly engaged employees increased on average by 16% in 2004 in comparison

to the industry average of 6%. Similarly, the stock price of organisations with high

4
morale had superior performance to comparable companies in the same industry by a

ratio of 2.5:1 during 2004. Conversely the stock price of companies with low morale

underperformed in relation to the industry competitors by a ratio of 5:1.

According to Sirota (2005) Morale e is a direct consequence of being treated well

by the company, and employees return the gift of good treatment with higher

productivity and work quality, lower turnover (which reduces recruiting and training

costs), a decrease in workers shirking their duties, and a superior pool of job

applicants. These gains translate directly into higher company profitability. Satisfied

employees lead to satisfied customers, which results in higher sales. Satisfied

customers and higher sales, in turn, result in more satisfied employees who can enjoy

the sense of achievement and the material benefits that come from working for a

successful company. Its a virtuous circle the best of all worlds.

Engagement Definition

Kahn (1990) was credited with conceptualising the term personal engagement which

he defines as the harnessing of organisational members selves to their work roles;

in engagement, people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively and

emotionally during role performances.

Kahns study started with the work of Goffman (1961), as well as looking across

disciplines such as psychology (Freud 1922), sociology (Merton 1957) and group

theorists (Slater 1966, Smith & Berg 1987) who all documented the natural

resistance of an individual, concerning becoming a member of on-going groups and

systems. The individual seeks to prevent total isolation or engulfment by being in a

constant state of flux towards and away from the group (Kahn 1990). Kahn named

5
this forward and backward flux as, personal engagement and personal

disengagement.

The cognitive aspect of employee engagement deals with the employees beliefs

about organisation factors such as, how it is led, by whom and the working

conditions which exist within the organisation. The emotional element deals with

how the employee feels about each of the three aforementioned factors and if they

possess a positive or negative attitude towards the organisation and its leader(s). The

physical aspect of Kahns definition relates to the physical energies employed by

individuals in order to carry out their organisational role(s).

The literature concerning employee engagement poses a challenge due to the fact

that there is no one universally applied definition to cover the topic of employee

engagement. According to Baumruk (2004) employee engagement has been defined

within the confines of emotional and intellectual commitment to the organisation or

the quantity of discretionary effort, defined by Yankelovich and Immerwahr (1984),

as the voluntary effort employees provide above and beyond what is required by

employees in their job (Frank et al 2004). From Kahns definition it is clear that

employee engagement is a multi-faceted paradigm. The multi-dimensional approach

to looking at engagement comes from the perspective that Kahn took on the

individuals working experience. Kahn (1990) argued that the work of Goffman

(1961) only concentrated on momentary face-to-face meetings, whereas an altered

concept needed to be developed which would transcend appropriately into

organisational life, which is, according to Diamond & Allcorn (1985), on-going,

emotionally charged and psychologically complex. Truss et al (2006), define

employee engagement as a passion for work, which encompasses the three

6
elements of engagement, previously discussed by Kahn (1990) in one psychological

state.

Due to the varying definitions of employee engagement, the results of different

studies become difficult to examine. This is because each study may look at the

subject of employee engagement through a different lens, depending on the

definition they decide upon. According to Ferguson (2007), with a universal

definition of employee engagement lacking, it cannot be accurately defined and thus

it cannot be measured and thus managed. According to Robinson et al (2004), while

it has been noted that employee engagement has been defined in numerous ways, a

number of those definitions within their construct are similar to more established

con-structural definitions relating to organisational commitment and organisational

citizenship behaviour (OCB). Robinson et al (2004) define engagement as one step

up from commitment, which begs the question, is employee engagement just old

wine in a new bottle?

Saks (2006) argues that employee engagement differs from organisational

commitment (OC) on the grounds that OC represents a persons attitude and

connection concerning their organisation, while on the other hand, engagement is

more than an attitude, it is how psychologically, cognitively and behaviourally

employed the individual is in their role, displayed by how attentive they are to their

work and how absorbed the individual is in the performance of the role. Employee

engagement also differs from OCB, as engagement is concerned with the passion for

ones role, while OCB is concerned with extra-role and voluntary behaviour.

7
 The context for analysing the employee engagement phenomenon

The employment relationship is the arena in which employee engagement will either

be fostered or negated. The employment relationship has had much iteration through

the years, with the employment level as well as union presence and strength exerting

an influence over the relationship. Harbison and Myers (1959) discuss the shift

among employers in the early nineteenth century, where employers were beginning

to come to the realisation that in order to create satisfactory conditions for capital

accumulation they would need to utilise subordination, loyalty ( a characteristic of

the unitary perspective) and increased productivity (combating Saint Monday)

among workers. Pollard (1968) proposed three employer methods for managing and

maintaining discipline among the workforce, (1) the proverbial stick (pp. 218-221);

(2) the proverbial carrot (pp. 221-225) and (3) the attempt to create a new ethos of

work order and discipline. These three methods were along a spectrum, the carrot

at one end and the stick at the other, it was up to employers (more so management)

as to how they would utilise each element.

Fredric Taylor was the author of a plethora of ideas which culminated in the concept

of scientific management. Under Taylorism, organisations had to have a formalised

structure and reporting line; tasks should be studied and redesigned to enable them to

be separated into the most efficient workable elements. These tasks were carried out

by the individual, as Taylor had a preference for designing the task around the

isolated individual as opposed to the team, as he thought that herding workers into

a gang resulted in each individual becoming less efficient. Taylor believed in one

best way to do a task, which to this day can be seen in the debate within modern

human resource management, of best practice versus best fit.

8
Efforts were made in Britain in order to construct an alternative to Taylorism, which

resulted in the formation of the human factor industrial psychological school of

thought. One of their first finding was that productivity could be increased by

reducing the amount of hours in the working week, thus contradicting conventional

worker productivity logic. However, while its purpose of conception was to develop

an alternative to Taylorism, the human factor industrial psychology school had the

Taylorian concept of industrial efficiency.

The employment relationship was shifting focus away from the isolated individual

under Taylorism and towards a human relations approach which was characterised

by placing an emphasis on the workgroup and thus initiatives to improve

organisational performance were based on work group behaviour and response. The

human relations school of thought viewed the worker as a social man who desired

social as well as economic compensation from his work as opposed to the purely

economic man which was characterised under Taylorism. The empirical base and

ideological construct of the human relations school of thought has its origins in the

human factor and anthropological phases of the Hawthorn program.

Technological advancements have caused the employment relationship to evolve as

explained by Woodward (1965) who employs the concept of a socio-technical

system in order to analyse various forms of production system and associated worker

behaviour. Rose (1988) reiterates Woodwards (1965) findings, stating that, the

effectiveness of a firm relates to the fit between its production system and its formal

organisation and not to the leadership style of supervisors or to participative,

interlocking teams.

9
The neo-human relations school of thought is characterised by placing the focus on

motivation of the individual from a life perspective, which was conceptualised by

Maslow in an article he published concerning individual motivation in Psychological

Review in 1943. Maslows theory was further developed by McGregor (Theory X

and Y) and Hertzberg.

Engagement has its roots in motivational theory, which was first propositioned by

Elton Mayos motivation experiments in Cicero, Chicago, 1927-1932. These

experiments resulted in the proposal that workers are motivated by emotional rather

than economic factors. So an employee will place more importance on being

involved and feeling important than by an improvement in workplace conditions.

Mayo set down the groundwork on which later theorists, such as Hertzberg, Maslow

and McGregor would build their theories. However, academics such as

Roethlisberger and Dickinson (1939) have critiqued the validity of Mayos study and

come to the conclusion that under the umbrella of the classic unitary stance, it is

individual relations and thus communication which act as the determinant of

workers behaviour, not the structural characteristics of employment in a capitalist

society.

From 1927 to now, theories have moved through various reassertions from industrial

psychology to total quality management, to organisational development. Pfeffer

(1998) established the link between the effective management of human capital

resulting in successful business performance. Engagement is now being considered

as an aspect which the Human Capital Management theorists are beginning to

formulate metrics on. Also the interventions to facilitate and generate increased

engagement are being developed to foster increased performance levels and their

measurable impact on the bottom line of an organisation.

10
 Human Capital Management

Human capital management has become an important aspect in relation to the

development and sustainment of organisational competitive advantage.

Organisations have begun to recognise that a great deal of the added value created by

the organisation is becoming ever more dependent on assets other than physical

capital (machines, trucks, vans etc). There has been a shift towards placing an

importance on the value which intellectual capital adds to the organisation. The

growth in recognition of these intangible assets has stimulated the academic

literature, with contributions from writers such as Mayo (2001), Miller and

Wurzburg (1995) and Sveiby (1997) to name a few.

Disengagement

Disengagement can be regarded as the decoupling of the psychological self from the

work role and involves people retracting and guarding themselves during role

performances, Kahn (1990) and Hochschild (1983). Employees that are not engaged

are in effect checked out. They float through their work day, putting time, not

energy or passion into their work. According to Robinson (2006) every day,

disengaged workers undermine what their engaged workers accomplish. So it seems

as though disengagement not only affects the individual who is disengaged, but the

rest of the organisation populous also. Disengaged employees exhibit piecemeal role

performances characterised by effortless, programmed or robotic actions (Kahn

1990).

As a result of his study Kahn discovered that three psychological conditions which

were connected to engagement or disengagement in the work environment:

11
meaningfulness, safety and availability. Kahn (1990) argued that employees propose

to themselves three fundamental questions within the context of each role situation:

1. How meaningful is it for me to bring myself into this performance?

2. How safe is it to do so?

3. How available am I to do so?

Kahn (1990), from his research, found that the engagement level of individual

employees was enhanced in circumstances where increased psychological

significance and psychological safety were offered combined with their

psychological availability.

Engagement and the Psychological States

May et al (2004) was the first empirical study to test Kahns (1990) model. May et al

(2004) establish that, in line with Kahns (1990) study, meaningfulness, safety and

availability is strongly positively correlated to engagement. Job enrichment (the

development of increasing intrinsic job elements and down-grading attention of

extrinsic factors, Kaplan, Tausky & Bolaria [1969]) and role fit to be positively

correlated with meaningfulness; rewarding co-worker and encouraging supervisor

relations were positively correlated with safety. Conversely, loyalty to worker norms

and self-consciousness were negative predicators of safety. The amount of resources

available to the individual were positively correlated with psychological availability,

on the other hand participation in outside activities was negatively correlated with

psychological availability. Meaningfulness was found to be the most influential

psychological dimension in determining engagement levels among individuals in the

workplace.

12
From researching the literature, an alternative model of engagement has emerged

from the burnout literature. Job engagement is perceived as a positive anti-thesis of

burnout, as according to Maslach et al (2001), individual burnout encompasses the

attrition of engagement with ones job/role. Maslach et al (2001) propose six

determinable areas in the work-life dichotomy, which can result in either burnout or

engagement: workload, control, rewards and recognition, community and social

support, perceived fairness and values.

Maslach et al (2001) constructed a connection between increased job engagement

and the management of the six work-life areas. Engagement is facilitated by, a

sustainable workload which challenges the individual without negatively impacting

them mentally and/or physically. Goal-setting theory (Locke 1968), can be utilised in

relation to the achievement of realistic workloads in order to enhance engagement

levels. Feelings of choice and control, suitable reward and recognition, the presence

of a supportive work community, fairness and integrity and meaningful and

appreciated work will foster personal engagement. May et als (2004) findings in

relation to meaningful and valued work reiterated Maslach et al (2001) belief that

meaningful and valued work is associated with engagement and thus the concept of

meaning is an important consideration when looking at the engagement generation

process.

Individual employees perceptions of meaning are a pre-determinant of their

engagement levels and ultimately their level of performance (Holbeche & Springett

2003). Holbeche & Springett (2003) propose that employees pro-actively seeks out

to clarify meaning within their work, organisations need to enable this clarification

to take place or the employee will become actively disengaged and is likely to leave

the organisation. According to Holbeche & Springett (2003) high levels of employee
13
engagement can only be facilitated through workplaces which are characterised by a

common purpose, which links people at an emotional level and thus advances their

personal hopes.

From the research carried out by Kahn (1990), it has been established that there are

specific psychological states which need to be active in order for engagement to

occur. However, what Kahn (1990) does not fully explain is why individuals respond

to these psychological conditions in a variety of ways. Saks (2006) proposes a link

between the differing reactions and resulting engagement levels in relation to the

psychological states by looking through the lens of Social Exchange Theory (SET).

The SET frame of reference consists of obligations which are created via a cycle of

interactions between individuals/groups that operate in a condition of mutual

interdependence. Under the SET, the relationship will evolve over time, with trust,

loyalty and mutual commitment increasing, on the condition that the rules of

exchange are not breached.

Under SET, these rules tend to be repayment rules, where the actions of one party

cause the action/reaction of another party. This form of interaction supports

Robinson et als (2004) explanation of employee engagement being characterised as

a two-way relationship between employer and employee. As previously mentioned

under SET there are unspecified obligations within the employment relationship

which can facilitate engagement. The psychological contract is an attempt by

academics to develop a construct around which to place these implicit obligations

and expectations.

According to Fox (1974) the employment relationship is shaped as much by social as

well as economic exchanges. Levinson et al (1961, 21) defines the psychological

14
contract as, a series of mutual expectations of which the parties to the relationship

may not themselves be dimly aware, but which nonetheless govern their relationship

to each other. According to Schein (1978), employee dissatisfaction, alienation and

by inference, employee disengagement comes from violations within the

psychological contract, which takes the form of overt issues such as pay, working

hours, and conditions of employment, which end up establishing the foundations of a

negotiable agenda, rather than the psychological agenda from which they were

initiated.

As previously mentioned, engagement within the employment relationship, under

SET is characterised by mutual interdependence. However, according to Cullinane &

Dundon (2006), the employment relationship is characterised as a relationship of

subordination linked to conditions of interest conflict. Under capitalism, the

employee is perceived as a resource to be utilised to its full capacity, with little or no

scope for co-decision making. As a result of this stance on the employment

relationship, the interests of the employee are subordinate to that of the employer,

resulting in a lack of trust by employees towards the employer. This lack of trust will

obstruct the facilitation of the engagement process.

Due to the current economic climate, competitive pressure on employers has

increased in relation to reducing labour and production costs, which means that

employers often find themselves in a situation where it is necessary to facilitate the

longevity of the organisation, resulting in decisions that have a negative impact upon

employees. Unfortunately, employer distrust and suspicion of management actions

ensues and the employment relationship is characterised by apathy, begrudging

compliance and resistance (Cullinane & Dundon 2006).

15
Saks (2006) proposes that an individual may reimburse their organisation via their

level of engagement. Employees can decide to engage themselves at a higher level

due to the resources which are invested in them by the organisation. This

reimbursement will be displayed by the employee in the form of increased cognitive,

physical and emotional resources to achieve organisational goals and objectives

(Kahn 1990).

Consequences of Engagement

Saks (2006), proposed a split to the concept of engagement into two distinct parts:

(1) job engagement and (2) organisation engagement, which he puts forward are

related but separate constructs. He argues that the relationship between job and

organisation engagement vary in numerous ways, resulting in the inference that the

psychological states which result in the two aforementioned forms of engagement

and their consequences are not the same. The consequences of employee

engagement, which have been discussed by academics and practitioners tends to be

positive. It has been proven that a highly engaged workforce can deliver increased

financial performance results for an organisation (Harter et al 2002). This proof is

evident from the previous example given by Sears. According to the Gallups Q12

Index (Smith & Cantrell 2011), a 0.10 increase in engagement (on a five point scale)

is worth an estimated $100,000 in incremental profit per store per year as seen in the

case of electronics store Best Buy.

Kahn (1990) didnt specifically mention the financial benefit to the organisation of

possessing a highly engaged workforce. He did propose in his 1992 study that high

engagement levels would produce positive consequences for the individual in the

form of increased quality of work and the increased enjoyment of the individual

16
experience of doing the work. A highly engaged workforce would also confer

positive consequences to organisational level outcomes in the form of increased

growth and productivity of the organisation (Kahn 1992).

Research carried out by the International Survey Research (ISR) team and Gallup is

positively correlated with the research of Harter et al (2002). Ott (2007) expands on

the research findings of Gallup and comments on the relationship between increased

engagement and the increase in earnings per share (EPS) among publically traded

companies. Ott (2007) found that in publically traded companies, if there were four

or more engaged employees for every one disengaged employee, the organisation

would experience 2.6 times the growth than an organisation with had a ratio of less

than 4:1 engaged versus disengaged employees.

From the meta-analysis carried out by Gallup (2004), it was discovered that, the top

quartile organisations which have the previously mentioned 4:1 ratio or greater have,

12% higher customer support, 18% higher productivity and 12% higher profitability

than the bottom quartile organisations. Conversely, the bottom quartile

organisations, according to the Gallup (2004) meta-analysis experience 31%-51%

more employee turnover and 62% more work related accidents than the

organisations in the top quartile.

17
Chart 1 EPS Growth Rate

Employee Engagement-Cultural, Economic & Occupational Contexts

When attempting to compare engagement across the globe, caution must be

exercised due to influencing factors such as culture (Hofstede 1997) and varying

definitions of engagement as previously discussed. The main body of research in

relation to global comparisons of engagement comes from Gallup. Gallup conducted

an engagement survey in 2005 giving the following results:

Table 1 - Engagement Spread Asia

Country Thailand Australia China Japan New Zealand Singapore

Engaged % 12% 18% 12% 9% 17% 9%

Due to the increased globalisation of markets and the ever growing presence of

multi-national organisations as well as the utilisation of outsourcing and cross-

functional teams located in different geographic locations, engagement is worth

analysing. Different economic and cultural factors need to be given consideration

when attempting to compare and analyse engagement at a global level. Research

18
carried out by the International Survey Research Consultancy (ISR) analysed

engagement across ten of the worlds largest economies.

The survey results displayed that there are varying levels of engagement across the

countries and supports the theory that one size does not fit all when it comes

motivating individuals to engage with their organisation and work. For example, in

Hong Kong and Japan, management and seniority are highly respected (a cultural

aspect), which transpired to be a significant determinant of engagement.

Towers Perrin (2003), a consultancy firm, carried out an engagement survey, which

involved 85,000 individuals who worked full-time in large and medium sized US

firms. The survey found that only 14% of employees worldwide were highly

engaged in their roles. The survey also found that on a country by country basis, the

engagement levels differed, reiterating the findings of the ISR research.

Looking at the geographical spread from a job level, it emerged that senior managers

were more highly engaged that any other group and also less likely to become

disengaged (Towers Perrin 2003). Remuneration was seen as important for the

engagement levels of the senior management, but was not the only determinant.

Things such as challenge, power, autonomy, stimulation, access to information,

resources and growth opportunities were factors which facilitated high engagement

levels among senior management.

Conversely, low engagement levels were found to be prevalent among hourly paid

workers who were characterised by having a low amount of autonomy over their

role. Another finding that came from the Towers Perrin (2003) research was the

presence of high engagement in the non-profit sector compared to all other sectors.

This finding makes sense, as people who enter this industry generally have a strong

19
sense of mission which is primary in relation to the secondary wealth accumulation

driver. This finding links in with Truss et als (2006) view of the definition

engagement as a passion for work which is considered the key factor.

Engagement Models

The ISR Model

From the research carried out by ISR in relation to employee engagement they have

found that an organisation must locate and understand the current components and

scope of its employee engagement in order to understand how to improve it.

As a result of their research, ISR developed a three component model to aid in the

understanding of employee engagement at an organisational level, the Think, Feel

and Act model. The three elements are of mutual importance to facilitate

organisational understanding of the employee engagement process in order to access

the current level of engagement and to set out a path to improve this level of

engagement.

Chart 2 - The ISR Model

BEHAVIOURAL COGNITIVE
AFFECTIVE
Feel
Act Think

ENGAGEMENT

20
According to ISR, cognitive (think) occurs when an individual agrees with the

mission, values and goals of the organisation in question and buys into them,

resulting in a sense of belonging to and contributing towards the organisation. In

relation to the affective (feel) element of the model, ISR comment that as a positive

consequence of attaining buy in engaged employees feel a sense of pride in their

association to the organisation. Affective is the element within the model which can

be closely correlated with organisational loyalty. The last and most critical element

of the ISR model is the behavioural (Act) element. This element consists of the

actions the individual within the organisation will display, thus reinforcing their

beliefs and feelings. There are two aspects to this element, which are:

1. The individuals aspiration to remain with the organisation and the

probability that the individual is considering other employers.

2. The amount of discretionary effort encompassing going above and beyond

their normal duties in order to ensure organisational success.

According to ISR strong employee engagement comes from a combination of all

three components of the model. The three components described under the model

need to be measured so that relevant and effective interventions can be designed to

improve engagement levels within the organisation. The ISR recommend, that a

cluster analysis be conducted, which will group individuals within your organisation

who have similar engagement scores. This means that the intervention programmes

can be developed to target specific groups with unique issues. A locator analysis

should also be conducted in order to locate where in the organisation your

engagement levels are highest and lowest.

21
Chart 3 - An Employee Engagement Cross Section

(Source: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2009/03/19111703/4)

Under the ISR model and code of best practice, the organisation should, post cluster

analysis, carry out a linkage analysis in order to find out how and why employee

engagement links to key performance indicators of the organisation, for example

customer service. By doing so, the extent to which engagement is effecting your

overall business can be found. The next step under the ISR model is to draw up an

action plan, in order to translate the results of the engagement survey and linkage

analysis into appropriate interventions to facilitate employee engagement generation

and growth. Finally, periodic measurement is required to confirm that objectives are

being achieved.

The Corporate Leadership Council

The Corporate Leadership Council Model put the focus on leverage points in order

to produce and maintain high engagement within an organisation. The four leverage

points are:

1. Focus on the Business

2. Focus on Key Contributors

22
 3. Focus on Engagement Barrier Removal

4. Focus on developing an engagement culture

Table 2 The Corporate Leadership Council Model

Leverage Point 1 Leverage Point 2 Leverage Point 3 Leverage Point 4

Focus on the Business Focus on Key Focus on Engagement Focus on Culture

Contributors Barriers

Strategic Solid Cultural Culture

Engagement performer assessment Leaders

Gap Analysis career process Culture change

pathing engagement

cascade

Values

realisation

system

Business Redefine What is the Restructure

Strategy solid relationship leadership to

translated to performers between the enable

organisational contribution culture and contribution

capabilities Remove business Involve

Measure barriers results managers

employee Maximise Identify Build

engagement life time visible and opportunities

Determine contribution invisible for

drivers of performers aspects of contribution in

Assess risk culture the company

compared to Identify Translate

engagement barriers values into

data and Determine actions and

23
 capabilities cultural behaviours

Build action barriers to Reinforce

plan to engagement values

address gap Create Assess

continuous alignment of

cycle behaviours

with values

Report to

internal and

external

stakeholders

Literature Review Conclusion

Much of the research on employee engagement has been carried out by practitioners

due to a gap in the academic literature on the topic. Research practitioners such as

the Corporate Leadership Council, Perrins and the ISR have carried out quantitative

and qualitative research globally across industry, gender and pay.

1. The interaction of the three elements of the ISR model of think, feel and act

can lead to the generation and sustainment of employee engagement. The

act element is seen as the most important, due to the fact that it is based on

the actual as opposed to intended behaviours of the employee.

2. Employee engagement levels are a strong determinant of whether

employees are productive and remain with the organisation or are actively

disengaged and may move out of the organisations.

3. HR in conjunction with the management team need to implement a strategy

which will result in the generation of positive effective managers and

24
employees, which are reinforced by appropriate workplace policies and

practices in order to facilitate employee well-being in the form of a healthy

work/life balance. The manager of the staff is the ultimate employee

engagement driver.

25
 CHAPTER THREE

Research Aims and Objectives

Research Aims

The overarching aim of this study is to attempt to find out what encourages

employees to have a passion for the job they do, which encourages them to display

discretionary effort thus going the extra mile to do their job to the very best of their

ability. The generation and harnessing of high employee engagement has been link

to high levels of individual performance as well as increased organisational financial

performance.

The researcher aims to develop an Employee Engagement Strategy for Topaz South

Dublin. This strategy will have the objectives of enabling the organisation to hold

onto the most talented individuals while decreasing staff turnover. However, this will

require future work and research after this body of work has been completed.

Areas of Interest

What is the level of engagement in the Topaz Energy South Dublin

Region?

Are line managers and supervisors engaged in their work?

What categories of staff are most engaged?

Research Objectives

Measure the level of engagement at the Topaz Energy stations in the

South Dublin region

How to get employees engaged in their work?

26
 Benchmark Topaz South Dublin region against the latest CIPD

engagement survey (2006)

Hypothesis

Topaz as a customer focused organisation employees the vast majority of their staff

as sales assistants, which is a customer facing role. Also the supervisor, assistant

manager and manger roles have customer facing aspects, for example, when a

member of the management team needs to cover the till in order to relieve a sales

assistant to have their break. Due to the nature of the role and the high level of

customer contact the concept of employee engagement seemed an important aspect

to be researched. Thus the generation of hypothesis 1 below:

Hypothesis 1 Staff at Topaz South Dublin are more engaged than the

average worker as per the CIPD report (2006).

27
 CHAPTER FOUR

Methodology

For the dissertation, as part of the research strategy, the researcher had to decide

which methodology or combinations of methodology were going to be most practical

and yield the best results from the primary research. There are two types of

methodological approach that can be used. These two approaches are qualitative and

quantitative. Quantitative research can be utilised as a research strategy if the

emphasise of the research is on quantification in the collection and analysis of the

data. Quantitative analysis involves using a deductive approach to the relationship

between theory and research, where the emphasis is placed on testing the theories.

Quantitative analysis also incorporates common practices and norms of the natural

science model and of positivism in particular. Quantitative analysis represents a view

of social reality as an external objective reality.

Qualitative analysis on the other hand is utilised as a research strategy, where the

researcher is looking to emphasise words instead of trying to look for quantification

in the collection and analysis of data. With qualitative analysis the main emphasis is

on an inductive approach to the relationship between theory and research where

importance is placed on the generation of theory/theories. Qualitative analysis

discards the practices and norms of the natural scientific model and of positivism and

instead looks at the ways in which individuals interpret their social world.

Qualitative analysis adopts a view of social reality as a constantly changing, shifting

and emergent property of an individuals creation.

28
For the initial phase of this study, there was a necessity to review and analyse both

current and preceding literature in relation employee engagement. This enabled the

researcher to determine the main themes that warrant exploration and also facilitate

the definition of the scope, aims and objectives. For the research both primary and

secondary data were utilised in order to fully research the phenomenon.

This study proposed to investigate the existence and current level of employee

engagement at the Topaz Energy South Dublin service stations. In order to prime his

knowledge base on the area, the researcher researched, analysed and evaluated the

available secondary data. According to Kotler and Armstrong (2004, pp.135-136),

secondary data is made up of information that already exists somewhere having

been collected for another purpose.

After conducting the secondary research, the area of study necessitated the

undertaking of primary research in order to fully build a picture of the context in

which the phenomena takes place. Primary research according to Kotler &

Armstrong (2004, pp. 135-136) is information collected for the specific purpose at

hand. The study and analysis of employee engagement involved determining

attitudes and behaviours within the workplace. There were various methodological

options open to the researcher in order to measure the employee engagement levels

at Topaz Energy South Dublin service stations. A technique incorporating a wide

scope of questions seemed essential to cover the multi-faceted aspects of employee

engagement, thus a survey seemed the most appropriate aid to the researchers

analysis.

The participants in this study were 70 employees working in a south Dublin region

Topaz service station. Due to the scope of the sample size a survey seemed most

29
appropriate to aid in the research analysis. The survey was based on the CIPD (2006)

attitude and engagement survey. The CIPD survey has been tested for validity and

covered the scope of questioning required to cover such a complex area. The adapted

survey was piloted amongst colleagues in the service station the researcher works in,

in order to allow for any changes or clarifications.

Even though the researcher had the backing and support of service station

management as well as the regional manager, the respondents may view the survey

as a management exercise and choose not to complete the survey or answer the

survey in a way that they perceive management will want it to be answered. In order

to negate this bias the researcher included a cover letter with the survey stating that

all replies will only be viewed by the researcher and that after the research findings

have been collated all the documentation will be destroyed. In order to provide

transparency and gain buy-in from the employees the researcher informed the

individuals who completed the survey that if they wished they could provide their e-

mail address and the researcher would send each individual a soft copy of the

findings from the primary data research.

Survey Design

The survey that was used to conduct this research was modified from a survey

designed by the CIPD in the UK. It was utilised by the CIPD in order to conduct

independent research by the Kingston Business School and Ipsos MORI. The survey

was constructed to measure attitudes and engagement across a sample of 2,000

employees.

The survey was designed to measure the engagement of employees at service

stations in the south Dublin region of Topazs catchment area. Aspects such as job

30
satisfaction, flexibility, and current job content were included in the survey as they

were strongly linked to engagement. Employee engagement needs to be understood

and analysed within the context of the whole organisation taking into account

managerial actions, job specific features and individual preferences.

The survey was sectioned into six elements in order to analyse as many aspects of

the individual employer employee relationship. The six elements were:

Table 3 Breakdown of Survey

Section Question

Number Question Area Numbers

Section 1 YOUR WORKING LIFE Q1-Q3

Section 2 YOUR EMPLOYER Q4-Q8

Section 3 YOUR JOB Q9-Q13

Section 4 JOB SATISFACTION Q14-Q17

LEADERSHIP AND
Q18
Section 5 MANAGEMENT

Section 6 COMMUNICATION AT TOPAZ Q19-Q22

Section 7 THE FUTURE Q23-Q26

Details on the sections of the survey

Section 1 Your Working Life

This section of the survey poses questions about an employees working life. This

area was of importance as their working conditions have importance within the areas

31
of engagement, performance and intentions to leave the organisation. Once managers

know the cause of these factors they can be proactive in resolving them.

Section 2 Your Employer

This section was made up of questions about Topaz as an employer. The main reason

for this section in the survey was to gain an insight into how employees talk about

the organisation to outsiders, how proud they are to be working for the company, the

level of interest the employee has in the organisation, the level of employee

commitment to helping the company achieve its goals, immediate supervisor, fellow

employees, customers and extent to which they would recommend friends and

relatives to do business with Topaz. This section was questioning the branding of the

company and how much employees will display discretionary effort to maintain its

standing or improve it.

Section 3 -Your Job

Within this section, questions are posed to the employee about their job. This section

was the most important in relation to accessing engagement at an emotional level.

The questions involved, access how absorbing the role was and how attached or

detached the employee was when they are performing the role. Aspects of the role

such as autonomy/control are posed to the employee as well as how much support

they are given in the form of work/life balance.

Section 4 Job Satisfaction

In this section job satisfaction was questioned. Also, other aspects of job satisfaction,

such as physical working conditions, quality of the work completed, knowledge and

skills to do the job, job security, hours worked, job variety, attention to suggestions

made, promotion chances, management of the service station, relations with their

32
station manager, opportunities to use abilities, rate of pay, responsibility, immediate

supervisor, recognition, relation with fellow workers and comparison with others in

relation to job performance.

Section 5 Leadership and Management

This section consists of statements about the leadership and management of the

respective Topaz service stations. The section looked at aspects such as respect by

managers for employees, consultation, training and development, recognition and

value of the contribution made by employees, support given to employees in dealing

with problems as they arise, communication, clarity of the employee role as well as

listening and equity.

Section 6 Communication at Topaz

This section covered communication within the various Topaz service stations and

looked at aspects such as information flow, belief in the information, the chance to

feed information upwards and how sure the employees is that if a problem is sent up

the hierarchy that it would be dealt with fairly.

Section 7 The Future

Within this section, questions were posed to the employee, in relation to their future

within the organisation and are concerned with intention to quit and future

expectations about their individual career path.

Scales

The scale utilised for the survey was a Likert scale which allowed respondents to

choose from a range of 4/5 outcomes. For example:

33
Q3 Please state the extent to which you agree with the following statements about your work
PLEASE TICK
Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly
Disagree agree nor Agree
disagree

My job activities are personally meaningful

The work I do on my job is of value to me
The work I do on my job is of value to Topaz

Administration of the survey

Due to the number of employees involved and the geographical spread the researcher

decided to hand deliver the survey to the respective Topaz service stations around

south Dublin. The researcher allowed one week for the survey to be completed by all

staff, including those who may only work weekends. This was done in order to get a

full cross reference of all staff members as well as boosting the return rate. The

researcher handed out 140 surveys, of which 68 were returned.

Data Analysis

Cross-tabulations

Cross-tabulations were used to segment a data set in order to examine differences

between subgroups. An example of cross-tabulation would be the number of men

and women specified within each job function. Once the cross-tabulation has been

carried out, comparisons can be drawn to identify the existence of important

differences.

General Overview of Respondents

The survey was carried out among the current employees working for Topaz in the

South Dublin region. Of the 68 respondents 42 were male and 24 were female, which

34
 represents a percentage response rate of by gender of 63.6% (Male) and 36.4%

(Female). The respondents were spread across twelve sites within the South Dublin

region: Rochestown (4.41%), Dundrum (8.82%), Taylors Lane (10.29%), Forfield

(5.88%), Bray (13.24%), Elm Park (5.88%), Ballyboden (11.76%), Taney (7.35%),

Kilternan (4.41%), Donnybrook (7.35%), Wicklow (5.88%) and Dalkey (10.29%).

The respondents were characterised by a cross-section from sales assistant up to

manager level as the following table shows:

Table 4 Cross-section of Respondents by Grade

% of total
Respond
Level ents
Sales Assistant 69%
Supervisor 18%
Assistant Manager 5%
Manager 8%

Engagement

Employee engagement was looked at in more detail within this section of the

dissertation. From the literature review carried out earlier in the dissertation it has

been noted that engagement has three component parts:

Table 5 Engagement Components and Descriptors

Engagement Component Description

Utter focus on the work, not thinking about other things

Cognitive Engagement while performing the task

Emotional Engagement Having an emotional connection with your work

Physical (Behavioural Willing and able to display discretionary behaviour, to go

Engagement) the "extra mile" and work beyond your contract terms

35
The research carried out had the purpose of discovering how engaged employees

working in Topaz South Dublin service stations were. How much would they

recommend their organisation to other people as well as proactively advocating the

organisation? Engagement is a complex concept, as it encompassed how an

individual feels as well as the connected actions they display.

36
 Chapter 5

Findings Analysis & Discussion

Overall Engagement

For comparison purposes the researcher will collate strongly agree and agree, and

strongly disagree and disagree from the respondents answers to the proposed

questions.

After analysing the three dimensions of employee engagement the researcher was

able to arrive at the overall engagement level. As per the chart 4 below, 64% ( the

average of the three engagement elements under the engaged category) of Topaz

South Dublin employees are engaged, while 36% (the average of the three

engagement elements under the disengaged category) are disengaged.

Chart 4 Overall Engagement Levels

37
Cognitive Engagement

Respondents were asked two specific questions in relation to cognitive engagement.

Of the respondents, on average 44% were cognitively engaged while 56% were not

cognitively engaged. The remaining 25.45% were indifferent to the questions posed

in relation to cognitive engagement, from a research perspective; the researcher

found median responses a barrier to the analysis, an element to consider when

conducting future research. Nearly 38% of respondents stated that they think about

other things when performing their job, interestingly 26% stated that they are

distracted when performing their role.

Table 6 Overall Cognitive Engagement

Engaged Disengaged

Cognitively Engaged Total

I often think about other things when I'm

performing my job 44% 56%

I am rarely distracted when performing my

job 43% 57%

Average 44% 56%

The survey responses display a connection and resulting interface between individual

engagement levels, and the nature of the work being done. In relation to Topaz some

jobs will require a higher level of attention, for example managerial positions, these

positions are more likely to attract individuals who seek cognitively demanding

roles. The question, I often think about other things when Im performing my job,

was analysed by classifying strongly disagree /disagree responses as engaged and

38
strongly agree/ agree responses as disengaged. Conversely, the opposite was the case

for the question; I am rarely distracted when performing my job.

Emotional Engagement

Emotional engagement Baumruk (2004) examines the degree to which individuals

are involved in their jobs at an emotional level. On average 73.33% of employees at

Topaz service stations in South Dublin are emotionally engaged, while conversely

26.67% emotionally disengaged.

Table 7 Overall Emotional Engagement

Engaged Disengaged

Emotional Engagement Total

I really put my heart into my job 78% 22%

I get excited when I perform well in

my job 72% 28%

I often feel no emotion when I perform

my job 70% 30%

Average 73% 27%

Emotional engagement is connected with other positive perceptions Truss et al

(2006), about the role an individual plays in the organisation, as well as how that

individual perceives the organisational environment Diamond & Allcorn (1985), and

other aspects of engagement. In relation to Topaz the fostering and good

management of the relationship and processes which develop and sustain positive

emotions could impact overall engagement levels as well as individual performance

39
(Frank et al 2004). Questions, I really put my heart into my job & I get excited when

I perform well in my job Truss et al (2006), was analysed by classifying strongly

agree /agree responses as engaged and strongly disagree/ disagree responses as

disengaged. Conversely, the question, I often feel no emotion when I perform my job,

was analysed by classifying strongly disagree/disagree responses as engaged and

strongly agree/ agree responses as disengaged.

Physical Engagement

Physical engagement looks at the amount of physical effort Yankelovich and

Immerwahr (1984), an individual puts into their role. Nearly three-quarters of Topaz

South Dublin employees are physically engaged with their role with the

corresponding quarter being physically disengaged with their work. Interestingly the

aspect that employees were most engaged upon was the statement I stay until the

job is done.

The questions, I exert a lot of energy doing my job & I stay until the job is done was

analysed by classifying strongly agree /agree responses as engaged and strongly

disagree/ disagree responses as disengaged. Whereas the questions, I avoid working

overtime whenever possible & I avoid working too hard, was analysed by classifying

strongly agree /agree responses as disengaged and strongly disagree/ disagree

responses as engaged.

40
Table 8 Overall Physical Engagement

Physically Engaged Total Engaged Disengaged

I exert a lot of energy doing my job 64% 36%

I avoid working overtime whenever possible 62% 38%

I stay until the job is done 88% 13%

I avoid working too hard 83% 17%

Average 74% 26%

Engagement by Gender

When the genders are compared across the three engagement fields (cognitive,

emotional and physical) the female contingent of the respondents seem to be more

engaged that their male counterparts, which coincides with the findings of the ,

Employee Engagement Survey (2006) carried out by the CIPD, where increased

engagement relating to women is attributed to factors such as working a shorter

working week and being happier with their work -life balance, as per the CIPD

report 2006. However, looking specifically at physical engagement, men may rate

physical engagement lower than their female counterparts as they may not need to

expend as much energy as their female counterparts in performing the same task(s).

Ideally the energy requirements for each specific job should be ascertained, however

due to time constraints this was outside the scope of the dissertation for the

researcher.

41
 Table 9 Cognitive Engagement Gender Cross-Section

Male Female Male Female

Cognitively Engaged By Gender Engaged Engaged Disengaged Disengaged

I often think about other things

when I'm performing my job 42% 48% 58% 52%

I am rarely distracted when

performing my job 41% 50% 59% 50%

Average 42% 49% 58% 51%

Table 10 Emotional Engagement Gender Cross-Section

Male Female Male Female

Emotional Engagement By Gender Engaged Engaged Disengaged Disengaged

I really put my heart into my job 69% 91% 31% 9%

I get excited when I perform well in

my job 66% 78% 34% 22%

I often feel no emotion when I perform

my job 60% 83% 40% 17%

Average 65% 84% 35% 16%

42
 Table 11 Physical Engagement Gender Cross-Section

Male Female Male Female

Physically Engaged By Gender Engaged Engaged Disengaged Disengaged

I exert a lot of energy doing my job 56% 78% 44% 22%

I avoid working overtime whenever

possible 58% 70% 42% 30%

I stay until the job is done 87% 87% 13% 13%

I avoid working too hard 80% 91% 20% 9%

Average 70% 81% 30% 19%

Engagement by Age

Dose engagement vary with age? Table 12 shows 25-31 year old respondents are the

most cognitively and emotionally engaged while 18-24 year old respondents are the

most physically engaged. The cognitive element of the engagement is spread evenly

among the age ranges. Interestingly, 32-51 year old respondents showed lower

emotional engagement that the other two groupings. Emotional engagement as per

the literature is linked to performance and thus may warrant further study. The

emotional engagement results seem to contradict the results of the CIPD Employee

Engagement Survey 2006, which found that emotional engagement is lower in

younger individuals and higher in older individuals. Interestingly, physical

engagement is a facet of discretionary behaviour which seems to be maintaining a

high level across the age ranges. According to the CIPD Survey (2006) employees

under the age of 30 are the least engaged, as you can see from table 12 the younger

43
age groups scored higher across both cognitive and physical elements of

engagement.

Table 12 Engagement and Age Cross-Section

Age Engagement Percentage

18-24 Cognitive 45%

25-31 Cognitive 49%

32-50 Cognitive 44%

18-24 Emotional 72%

25-31 Emotional 77%

32-51 Emotional 48%

18-24 Physical 75%

25-31 Physical 63%

32-52 Physical 64%

44
Advocacy

Chart 5 below shows that 14.7% of respondents would speak highly of Topaz with

being asked thus they are the true champions of the organisation. It can be seen from

chart 6 that nearly 68% of employees would recommend Topaz to an individual

seeking a job opportunity. The 4.6% and 1.5% who strongly disagree and disagree

are actively disengaged.

Chart 5 Employer Advocacy

45
Chart 6 Recommend Topaz as a potential employer

I would recommend Topaz to someone who seeks my advice

about a job opportunity
13.80% 4.60%
1.50%

Strongly Disagree
Disagree
26.20%
Neither agree non disagree
Agree
53.80%
Strongly Agree

Chart 7 Proud to work for Topaz

Are you proud to tell people who you work for?

8.8%
13.2%

22.1% Very proud indeed

16.2% Proud
Quite Proud
Not very proud
Not proud at all

39.7%

Almost 70% of employees are proud to work for Topaz, while conversely 30% are

not proud at all and would actively discourage someone for applying for a job with

the organisation. Linking back to the CIPD survey 50% of employees are proud to

speak about their organisation if asked/or without being asked, whereas 21% would

be critical of their organisation without being asked / if asked.

46
Managerial Engagement

As per the CIPD Employee Engagement Survey (2006) findings, management are

more engaged that their subordinates. Managerial cognitive engagement is 63% will

for the rest of the respondents it averaged at 44%. Managerial emotional engagement

was the highest scoring engagement factor at 88% compared to 73% on average for

the rest of the respondents. Managerial physical engagement is however lower that

the rest of the respondents at 72% compared to 74%.

According to the CIPD Employee Engagement Survey (2006), management often

feel more positive in relation to their involvement and thus have higher engagement

as they feel they are given more support and recognition as well as being listened to

more than non-managers, Kahn (1990). Also managers tend to find their work more

meaningful Kahn (1990), than non-managers which results in a positive effect on

their overall engagement levels.

Chart 8 - Managerial Engagement

47
Work/Life Balance

According to the CIPD survey 2006 on employee engagement, employees who are

satisfied with their work-life balance are more engaged Maslach et al (2001), with

their work than those who are dissatisfied. When the statement I achieve the correct

balance between my home and work lives was put to the respondents, nearly 50%

agreed that they had the right balance between the hours they worked and the time

between shifts. However 11% of respondents are not satisfied with their work-life

balance which will negatively impact on their overall engagement level.

Chart 9 Work-Life Balance

In relation to Topaz providing support to employees to aid them in managing their

work life balance nearly 50% agreed that the organisation provided support.

However, 25% of employees were not satisfied that the organisation provided

adequate support to enable them to manage a healthy work-life balance.

48
Chart 10 Organisational Support of Work-Life Balance

Management & Leadership

One of the key determinants of how employees feel about their role and level of

performance is the treatment they receive from the management team. Supervisors,

assistant managers and managers have the ability to foster and enhance or erode

employee engagement. All management levels (supervisor, assistant manager and

manger) were included in this aspect of the survey.

The survey posed a number of statements to the respondent, to ascertain what their

true opinion of their immediate boss. From the results of the survey there a few

issues which arose:

1. 32% of respondents feel as though they are not consulted on matter of

importance to them which is higher than the CIPD figure of 20% who feel as

though they are not consulted on matters of importance.

49
2. 44% of respondents feel as though their developmental needs are not being

discussed compared to 32% of employee respondents from the CIPD who

feel as though their line manager dose not discuss their training and

development needs.

3. 36% of respondents feel as though they are not recognised / given praise

when they have performed well in their role, where as 20% of CIPD

respondents reported that they never/rarely recognises when I have done a

good job.

4. 32% of respondents feel as though their work is not appreciated by their line

manager, Maslach et al (2001) & (Holbeche & Springett 2003), where as

25% of respondents in the CIPD survey feel as though their line manger

rarely/never makes them feel as though their work matters.

5. 35% of respondents dont receive regular feedback on how they are

performing, compared to 30% of respondents in the CIPD survey.

6. 21% of respondents feel as though their line manger isnt open and honest

with them 100% of the time, where as 18% of the CIPD respondents felt as

though their line manger rarely/ never was 100% open and honest with them.

7. 29% of respondents feel as though their line manager doesnt keep in touch

with them as to what is going on in the business, compared to 20% of CIPD

respondents who feel as though their line manager rarely/never keep them in

touch with what is going.

8. 17% of respondents feel as though their line manager isnt always supportive

towards them if they have a problem to deal with compared to 15% of CIPD

respondents who feel as though their line manger is rarely/never supportive if

they have a problem.

50
 9. 15% of respondents feel as though their line manager does not make it clear

what is expected of them (Locke 1968), compared to 17% of CIPD

respondents who feel as though rarely/never dose their line manager make

clear what is expected of them.

10. 21% of respondents feel as though they are not listened to appropriately when

they have a suggestion to make, where as 17% of CIPD respondents feel as

though rarely/never are they listened to when they have a suggestion to

make.

11. 19% of respondents feel as though they are not treated fairly all the time by

their line manger, where as 10% of CIPD respondents feel as though they are

rarely/never treated fairly by their line manager.

Table 13 Line Manager Strengths & Weaknesses

Statement Always Usually Sometimes Rarely Never

Consults me on matters of importance to me 35% 33% 24% 8% 0%
Discusses my training and development needs 29% 27% 26% 18% 0%
Recognises when I have done a good job 35% 30% 21% 13% 2%
Makes me feel my work counts 29% 40% 19% 13% 0%
Gives me feedback on how I am performing 29% 37% 19% 14% 2%
Is open and honest 49% 30% 14% 5% 2%
Keeps me in touch with what's going on 33% 38% 21% 6% 2%
Is supportive if I have a problem 51% 32% 13% 3% 2%
Makes clear what is expected of me 48% 37% 13% 2% 0%
Listens if I have a suggestion to make 33% 46% 11% 8% 2%
Treats me fairly 49% 32% 13% 3% 3%

51
Chart 11 Line Manager Strengths & Weaknesses

Communication

Nearly 43% of respondents always believe the information that is disseminated in

relation to what is going on within the organisation, which is lower than the CIPD

engagement report of 61%. However, 11% of respondents stated that they can only

believe about half of the information given to them in relation to what is going on

within the business. Interestingly 80% of mangers and 67% of assistant managers

responded that the business kept them fully informed, while 20% of managers and

33% assistant managers responded that the business kept them fairly informed as to

what was going on in the business.

52
Chart 12 Internal Communication

4.7% Internal Communication

4.7% My business unit keeps me
6.3% fully informed

My business unit keeps me

fairly informed
45.3%
My business unit only gives
me a limited amount of
39.1%
information
My business unit doesn't tell
me much about what is
going on

Chart 13 Internal Communication Credibility

Chart 14 Internal Communication from Sales Assistant Perspective

53
The above chart shows the sales assistant internal communication perspective.

Overall the sales assistant grouping are well informed about the current issues within

the organisation, with 16% of respondents reporting limited information received on

internal developments.

Participation in Communications

Nearly 8% of respondents were very dissatisfied / dissatisfied with the chance to

feed their views, ideas and issues upwards. The location would not be a factor as all

service station managers work on site and have to work every second weekend,

which would give part time weekend staff a chance to have their views heard.

Chart 15 Internal Communication

Attitudes to Work

In the modern Irish economy many people are spending more time at work than with

their families. As a result of this shift towards an increased working week, the way

an individual feels towards their work will have an important impact on their overall

emotional wellbeing. As per the literature review, performance does not depend

solely on cognitive input of the employee but also how the employee engages

emotionally within their role.

54
This part of the research delves into how people feel about their work. One of the

key questions to answer is, are they happy with the work they do and the role they

perform in? Is the work meaningful to them personally, do they feel stress and

pressure as a result of their role?

Meaningfulness

If an employee finds that their work has personal meaning to him/her this should

have an impact on their feelings towards their work overall. For example, people

who have work goals which and tied into their own personal goals and interests are

much more likely to be more motivated, which can result in higher performance.

Chart 16 Attitudes to Work

The statement My job activities are personally meaningful scored an agree rating

of 40%, which is lower than the CIPD survey result of 56%. Conversely, the

statement, The work I do on my job is of value to me, equalled the CIPD survey

score at 75%. Interestingly, nearly 87% of respondents view the work they do as

valuable to the organisation.

55
Managers v Non-Managers

An interesting finding that came out of the research was the fact that 60% of

managers agreed that their job activities had personal meaning compared to 30% of

sales assistants. All mangers agreed that the work they carried out was of value to

them. The role performance of managers is more meaningful compared to that of

non-managers overall. All of the managers agreed that the work they do is of value

to Topaz which was reiterated by 91% of the respondents which filled the sales

assistant position.

Job Satisfaction

It is of interest to the organisation to find out how satisfied people are with their role

and work overall. Topaz, as a new organisation to the market has no previous data in

relation to job satisfaction. From the CIPD report (2006) the results show that 52%

of respondents felt very satisfied or satisfied with their current role while 26% were

very dissatisfied or dissatisfied. The findings from the survey carried out on Topaz

South Dublin employees reveal that, 66% or respondents are very satisfied or

satisfied with their role. Conversely, nearly 11% of respondents were very

dissatisfied or dissatisfied with their current role in the organisation.

56
Chart 17 Overall Job Satisfaction

Chart 18 Job Satisfaction Factors

57
It can be seen from the above chart that respondents derive the main components of

their job satisfaction from:

Satisfaction factor %
The amount of responsibility given 62%
Job security 61%
The physical working conditions 60%
Relations between employees and management 58%
Relation between co-workers 55%

The main dissatisfaction factors were:

Dissatisfaction factor %
Pay 50%
Amount of variety with the role 20%
Promotional Opportunities 17%
Recognition for good work 15%

Interestingly, from the data table below, management are satisfied with certain

aspects of the job satisfaction criteria while workers scored a higher satisfaction

rating. Managers were not as satisfied with recognition for their good work as their

non-management counterparts. While all managers are satisfied with their immediate

boss, 5% of non-managers are dissatisfied with their immediate boss.

Managers are more dissatisfied than non-managers in relation to physical working

conditions (20% V 2% respectively) and recognition for good work (40% V 14%

respectively).

58
Table 14 Job Satisfaction Manager v Non-Manager

Manager Non-Manager JS Manager Non-Manager

Satisfied Satisfied Question Dissatisfied Dissatisfied
60% 68% Physical Working Conditions 20% 2%
Freedom to choose working
80% 91% methods 0% 11%
100% 88% Relations with fellow workers 0% 2%
40% 63% Recognition for good work 40% 14%
100% 86% Immediate Boss 0% 5%
100% 71% Amount of responsibility given 0% 10%
0% 30% Rate of Pay 20% 54%
40% 43% Opportunity to use your abilities 0% 17%
60% 29% Chance of Promotion 0% 19%
Attention given to suggestions you
40% 46% make 0% 15%
80% 43% Amount of variety in your job 0% 24%
100% 67% Job Security 0% 10%
Relations between employees and
100% 86% management 0% 2%

59
Experiences of Stress and Pressure

Stress can have a negative impact on employee engagement and performance. 4.7%

of respondents reported that they experienced no stress in their role at all, while

37.5% and 40.6% of respondents reported mild and moderate amounts of stress in

their jobs respectively. 14. % and 3.1% of respondents reported very and extremely

stressful elements to their role.

Chart 19 Stress Levels across all respondents

Respondents were also asked how often they felt elements of stress in performing

their role as show in the chart 20:

Chart 20 How Often Respondents Felt Under Excessive Pressure

60
Chart 21 Stress Level Comparison Manager v Non-Manager

The comparison between managers and non-managers is show in the chart 20 above.

40% of managers responded that there were elements of their role that were very

stressful while only 9% of non-managers found elements of their role very stressful.

Interestingly the spread of moderate stress within a role function is spread evenly

between managers and non-managers.

Control

Control within a role context is an important factor relating to how people feel about

their work. People who feel as though they are not in control of their work are more

likely to experience stress within their role. Employees who experience increased

autonomy and thus increased control are more likely to have lower work-related

stress levels. 85% of respondents reported a great deal or a fair amount of control in

relation to how they do their work.

61
Chart 22 Control Within The Respondents Role

1. 17% of respondents experience high or excessive amounts of pressure.

2. 65% of respondents experience stress once or twice a month.

3. 7% of respondents experience stress every day.

4. In relation to comparing manager and non-manager control from the

perspective of a great deal of and fair amount of control, there was no

significant difference.

Emotional Responses To Work

By understanding individual emotions it can give an insight into individual

behaviours which is an essential element within the performance management

context. In many circumstances, individuals who have a positive feeling towards

what they do will enable them to perform better.

62
Looking forward to Work

When the statement How often do you look forward to going to work was put to

the respondents, 7.4% responded all of the time, 72% responded most/some of the

time and nearly 21% responded that they rarely/never look forward to going to work.

Interestingly, 100% of managers look forward to going to work most of the time.

Conversely, there is a greater spread among sales assistances in relation to their

attitude about going to work as seen in the chart 23.

Chart 23 How Often Respondents Look Forward to Going To Work

22% of respondents rarely or never look forward to going to work, which is a

concern for the organisation due to the importance they place on employee

engagement with the customer and the emphasises placed on customer service.

Interestingly, only 7.4% of respondents look forward to coming to work all the time.

63
Chart 24 Looking Forward To Going To Work: Manager v Sales Assistant

Emotions experienced by respondents over the last few weeks

The respondents were asked six questions relating to their varying emotional states

they had experienced over the previous weeks. 70% of respondents were enthused

with by their role and 94% of respondents were content with the work within their

role, which scored higher than the CIPD (2006) survey of 33% and 43%

respectively. 21% of respondents said that they never felt enthused by their role,

which is an area of further research the organisation could undertake using this

research as a base platform.

64
Table 15

Scale All Respondents Never / Occasionally All/Most of the time

Enthusiastic Optimistic 18% 79%
Enthusiastic Enthused 24% 61%
Average 21% 70%
Content Calm 18% 94%
Anxious Tense 71% 6%
Depressed Miserable 80% 0%
Depressed Worried 60% 17%
Average 70% 9%

Opinions on Working for Topaz

72% of respondents like to know what is going on within the organisation and are

currently involved or would like to get more involved. 7.4% of respondents are not

interested in getting involved and merely view their role as just a job.

Chart 25 Respondents Opinion On Working For Topaz

65
Looking at involvement within the organisation by level, 80% of managers like to

know what is going on within the organisation and are well informed, or would like

to better informed. 100% of assistant managers reiterated the managers opinions, as

well as 92% of the supervisors. However, 8% of supervisors and 9% of sales

assistants are not interested in the organisation and see their role as just a job.

Loyalty

From the survey it was evident from the respondents that they displayed more

loyalty towards co-workers, be they supervisor, assistant manager or manger than the

organisation itself. The general levels of loyalty are high across the board, with some

interesting figures to follow. 42% of respondents felt a lot of loyalty towards the

organisation, while 35% felt some loyalty towards the organisation. 77% of

respondents felt loyalty towards their co-workers. The results for a lot and some

loyalty towards the organisation are slightly higher than the CIPD (2006) report

findings of 74%. 60% of respondents reported a lot of loyalty towards their direct

supervisor. 89% of respondents reported a lot/some loyalty towards the customer,

which is a positive aspect for the organisation as they place such importance on

employee engagement with the customer and customer satisfaction.

Outcomes

It is important for Topaz to investigate the impact that the role and working

environment has on an individual as this will be a key driver as to whether people

intend to leave the organisation. Previous research on employees engagement has

shown that employees who report lower satisfaction rating are more likely to leave

the organisation that their more satisfied counterparts.

66
Individual Performance

The respondents were asked to rate their performance under three headings. The first

heading was, I have the knowledge and skills that I need to do my work to a high

standard, which 91% of respondents were satisfied or very satisfied with, which is

over the CIPD (2006) survey figure of 81%. When the respondents were asked about

the standard of their work, 74% were very satisfied or satisfied and 89% of

respondents were very satisfied or satisfied that they were performing their role to

their best of their ability.

Chart 26 Satisfaction Factors

47% of respondents feel that their preformace is much higer than their co-workers.

This size of this figure could be inflated due to lack of accurate honest feedback

from line mangers to subordinates as well as individuals overestimating their own

performance as they do not have a clear indication of what is expected of them.

67
Chart 27 Performance Perspectives

Intentions to Quit

55.4% of respondents plan to stay with Topaz for the foreseeable future, whereas

nearly 19% of the respondents didnt see themselves with Topaz in the foreseeable

future. 11% of employees are actively looking in the market for new employment,

while 40% of respondents are looking to gain upward promotion with the

organisation. 0% of respondents interestingly are looking for lateral transfers and

25% are looking to stay where they are in their current role. Of those that intend to

leave the organisation, the following are the drivers:

Table 16 Employee Leaving Drivers

Better pay/benefits elsewhere 50%

To do a different type of work 42%
Other reasons 42%
Opportunities for promotion 25%
To be self-employed 17%
Easier/shorter journey to work 17%
To return to full time study 8%
Job satisfaction 8%
More flexible working hours 8%

68
Chart 28 Intention to Leave Breakdown 1

Chart 29 Inteention to Leave Breakdown 2

69
 Chapter 6

Management Implications

The outcomes from this study will give managers the information to develop

improved management interventions in order to increase employees engagement.

By increasing the overall level of employee engagement, the effect will be two fold,

employees will have an improved employment experience and as a result their

performance will be better.

Management have the biggest part to play in increasing employees engagement.

Managers must lead by example through their behaviour and commitment to the

organisation in order to foster a culture where high levels of engagement permeate

through all the employees. The concept of engagement and how to achieve the

desired level of engagement from an employee must be looked at holistically.

Engagement cannot be forced from individuals; engagement is a component of

managerial actions, the job itself and individual preference.

Managerial Engagement

Managers overall are more engaged than their subordinates. Managers have greater

cognitive and emotional engagement than their subordinates; however they are less

physically engaged than their subordinates. As previously mentioned, management

need to display the behaviours they want to foster in their staff, if management are

looking to increase the overall level of engagement among their employees they

themselves need to become more physically engaged, by physically showing they are

more engaged within their role and station, this will foster more positive engagement

development among the rest of the staff. Due to the nature of the staff structure

70
within Topaz service stations the manager will have the chance to display increased

physical engagement when performing tasks such as stacking shelves and facing off

the stock.

Work / Life Balance

Of the respondents, 11% were not satisfied with their work-life balance and of that

percentage, 25% thought that Topaz didnt provide adequate support to enable them

to sustain a healthy work life balance. An unhealthy work-life can lead to falling

engagement levels as well as driving employees to seek alternative employment.

Topaz managers should ensure that rosters are organised so as to meet peoples

work-life balance commitments while not negatively impacting business

performance. Providing a roster that caters to every individuals work life balance

needs is what the organisation should be attempting to do. Only 11% of respondents

were not satisfied with their work-life balance, so it seems as though Topaz

managers are handling the roster well.

Management & Leadership

From the research carried out, it emerged that employees felt that they were not

being involved in the business and that their development needs were not being met.

In relation to developmental needs this can have a negative impact on cognitive as

well as emotional engagement as employees begin to resent the mundane task they

are performing as they feel they can do more and as a result they become

emotionally detached from their role. Topaz managers need to schedule regular

developmental meeting with their staff to access how they are developing within the

role as to ensure they do not plateau. Managers need to ensure that all employees

know what is expected of them and that regular feedback is given to them, as well as

71
treating all employees fairly and explain variations in treatment as perceived unfair

treatment can result in disengagement.

Communications

Internal communication at Topaz across the board is good with 85% of respondents

saying that their business unit keeps them well informed. Managers need to ensure

that the communication channels are fully open to all employees, and that they

understand and believe the information that is being disseminated from head office.

The researcher recommends a weekly communications update meeting to cover

downward communication and to deal with queries from employees as to content or

impact any downward communication will have on their role.

Meaningfulness

In order for the managers of the service stations to bring meaning to their employees

roles, they need to link their employees personal goals to that of the service stations

goals. For example, the employees personal goal may be to gain their first

promotion within the next year. The manager should link promotional opportunities

to a business goal such as up and cross selling of products which as a result will tie

in the individuals goals to that of the business.

Job Satisfaction

The elements which caused job dissatisfaction to respondents were as follows:

Dissatisfaction factor %
Pay 50%
Amount of variety with the role 20%
Promotional Opportunities 17%
Recognition for good work 15%

72
In relation to pay, in the current economic climate organisation are constantly

looking to lower their cost base, and with operations which are heavily customer

service focused, such as Topaz the wage bill is a focal point for senior management

to keep as low as possible. Managers could offer cash bonus incentives for up-seller

of the month or implement a referral program which would actively encourage

employees to bring in new employees to the organisation.

The amount of variety within the role was also a source of dissatisfaction which was

coupled with a lack of promotional opportunities as employees began to disengage

with the tasks they already knew. To negate this feeling of boredom within a shift,

management could structure the tasks on a rotation basis so as to give each employee

the maximum variety in their shift as opposed to being at a till for 8 hours.

To combat dissatisfaction with recognition for good work done, the managers could

start to recognise employees based on weekly achievements such as up-seller of the

week as well as courses completed such as health and safety.

Stress and Pressure in the Workplace

Nearly 55% of respondents reported moderate to very stressful elements to their

roles, with 65% of respondents experiencing feelings of stress once or twice a

month. Going forward, in the researchers opinion the subject of work related stress

should be investigated further by managers within the specific service stations to

uncover specific situations resulting in increased stress levels in the work place and

implement appropriate interventions to combat the work related stress levels.

73
Control

15% of respondents were unhappy with the amount of control they had over the

manner in which they perform their role. Conversely, 85% of respondents were

happy with the amount of control they had over the manner in which they performed

their role. The researcher feels there are no significant management implications

relating to role control.

Opinions on working for Topaz and Loyalty

7.4% of respondents just saw their role in Topaz as a job and 20.6% of respondents

would like to know more about what is going on internally however, they do not

want to get involved. The researcher suggests that senior management need to look

at internal branding of the organisation in order to sell the success of the company to

the employees. From the survey 44.1% of respondents like to know what is going on

in the organisation and would like to get more involved. These respondents should

be utilised via an employer branding strategy which would utilise the 44.1% of

respondents with the end goal of making Topaz an employer of choice.

Loyalty towards the organisation is above the CIPD (2006) report which is a positive

aspect for the organisation. Organisational loyalty could be further enhanced via the

internal employer branding strategy as well as providing promotional criteria to

employees as this was a point of contention from 25% of respondents who said that

lack of promotional opportunities would encourage them to leave the organisation.

Intentions to Quit

From the research carried out the main drivers causing employees to leave the

organisation are:

74
 Better pay and benefits elsewhere

To do a different type of work

Opportunities for promotion

To become self-employed

Easier/Shorter journey to work

To return to full time study

Job satisfaction

More flexible working hours

It is important for Topaz to hold onto employees, as a constant turnover of staff can

lead to a drain in the tacit knowledge of the organisation as well as constant dips in

productivity as new people constantly have to be trained up. Opportunities for

promotion were earmarked by 25% of respondents as a push factor to make them

leave the organisation. Topaz HR team need to devise a set of competencies which

employees can be measure against to determine their appropriateness for promotion.

The competencies can be complimented by regular performance reviews and

personal development plans between the manager and his/her staff.

75
 Chapter 7

Conclusion

Employee engagement is concerned with the emotional, cognitive and physical

aspects of work and how these factors combine. The concept of employee

engagement should not be considered just another fluffy HR initiative. However,

fostering employees engagement is a long term process, as its success is

inextricably linked to core aspects of the business such as, values, culture and

managerial philosophy. To change core aspects of any business takes time effort and

commitment from the employees as well as the senior management team.

Employee engagement can be seen to have three elements, the cognitive, the

physical and then emotional. Due to the fact that employee engagement is a multi-

functional concept comprising three interacting elements, strengthens the argument

that a manger cannot force an employee to be engaged. Employees need to be

immersed in a working environment which will entice them to display the

discretionary behaviour that organisations are seeking.

An organisation that wants to increase engagement levels will attempt to foster the

factors which have a positive effect of engagement through every business activity

they perform. Organisations, as well as practitioner researchers, are attempting to

develop a metric in order to input employee engagement as a figure on the balance

sheet, however the problem arises as labour in many instances is seen as a cost rather

than an asset to the organisation.

According to the researchers survey results, 64% of employees were engaged. This

figure needs to be evaluated with a critical mind as respondents may have answered

76
questions in a manner which they think is in line with management desires. On the

positive side, going forward there are 40% of the respondents which the organisation

can attempt to win over. Managerial factors are the determining element in order to

foster increased engagement levels; this is the area where Topaz need to focus their

attention, as managers are on average more engaged then their subordinate

counterparts. Managers in order to increase engagement levels among their

employees need to display their commitment to the organisation to foster the same

commitment among the employees.

Employee engagement components within the Topaz service stations varied both

positively and negatively compared to the CIPD survey. This resulted in the research

hypothesis holding true for some aspects of employee engagement and being

disproved within other aspects of employee engagement. As this research project

was the first of its kind to be carried out in the organisation, the researcher feels that

going forward the same hypothesis can be utilised to benchmark the level of overall

and component employee engagement levels for variances.

In relation to the research itself, it was a positive aspect that so many employees

were willing to come forward and be so honest in making suggestions which can be

fed back up the business. The researcher hopes that this research adds to the body of

knowledge which the HR department and managers of Topaz have as part of the

managerial kit in order to drive engagement levels up and to maintain the excellent

customer service which drives the business forward.

Recommendations for Further Research

Organisations have become aware that it is no longer their patents, machinery or

location that give them the edge over their competitors. With the surge in

77
technological advancements tangible elements can be imitated faster than ever. It

has been recognised that it is the people component and resulting contribution which

adds value to the organisation and give a competitive edge to many organisations. A

prime example of this is the innovation fostering Google, whose growth and

dominance has been attributed to the innovation ideas generated from their people.

Due to time constraints this study was about scope rather than depth. Employee

engagement is a complex area as individual preferences play such a pivotal role in

the engagement process. One of the limitations of this study was that the data came

from surveys filled out by respondents independently which resulted in a less than

maximum return rate. If time constraints werent such a prominent factor, the

researcher may have opted for an in-depth questionnaire with open ended questions

to utilise quantitative as well as qualitative analysis to triangulate the data. Topaz

should carry out follow up studies on a regular basis in order to build a bank of

employee engagement data sets which potential metrics can be drawn from.

In closing, Topaz should develop a survey instrument, which aligns business goals to

action interventions and utilises qualitative research within the intervention to access

its impact, thus ensuring that the findings of the surveys are implemented upon and

not just left to gather dust on a shelf in the office.

78
Bibliography

Baumruk, R., (2004) The missing link: the role of employee

engagement in business successes, Workspan, Vol. 47, pp. 48-52.

Buchanan, L., (2004) The things they do for love, Harvard Business

Review, Vol. 82, Issue. 12, p.19-20

Cullinane, N. & Dundon, T., (2006) The psychological contract: A

critical review, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 8,

Issue. 2, pp. 113-129.

De Vita, E., (2007) Get engaged' [Internet]. In: Management Today.

Available from

http://www.managementtoday.co.uk/news/645870/engaged/?DCMP=IL

C-SEARCH [Accessed 15th June 2011]

Diamond, M. A. & Allcorn, S. (1985) Psychological dimensions of role

use in bureaucratic organizations, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 14,

Issue. 1, pp. 35-39.

Ferguson, A., (2007) Employee engagement: does it exist, and if so,

how does it relate to performance, other constructs and individual

differences? [online] Available at:

http://www.lifethatworks.com/Employee-Engagement.prn.pdf

[Accessed 16th June 2011].

Fox, A., (1974) Beyond Contract: Worker, Power and Trust Relations,

London, Faber & Faber in Cullinane, N. & Dundon, T., (2006) The

psychological contract: A critical review, International Journal of

Management Reviews, Vol. 8, Issue. 2, pp. 113-129.

79
 Frank, F.D., Finnegan, R.P., Taylor, C.R., (2004) The race for talent:

retaining and engaging workers in the 21 st century, Human Resource

Planning, Vol. 27, Issue. 3, pp.12-25.

Freud, S. (1922) in Ferguson, A. (2007) Employee engagement: Does it

exist, and if so, how does it relate to performance, other constructs and

individual differences? [online] Available at:

http://www.lifethatworks.com/Employee-Engagement.prn.pdf

[Accessed 29th June 2011]

Goffman, E., (1961) Encounters: Two Studies in the Sociology of

Interaction - Fun in Games & Role Distance, Indianapolis, Bobbs-

Merrill.

Harbison, F. and Myers, C. (1959), Management in the Industrial

World, McGraw-Hill, New York.

Harter, J.K., Schmidt, F.L. & Keyes, C.L., (2002) Well-being in the

workplace and its relationship to business outcomes: A review of the

Gallup studies, in Kular, S., Gatenby, M., Rees, C., Soane, E., & Truss,

K., (2008) Employee Engagement: A Literature Review, Working

Paper Series, No. 19, London, Kingston Business School, Kingston

University.

Hochschild, A., (1983) The Managed Heart: Commercialization of

Human Feeling, Berkeley, University of California Press.

Hofstede, G., (1997) Culture and Organisation: Software of the Mind,

Intercultural Cooperation and its Importance for Survival, London,

Harpercollins Business.

80
 Kahn, W.A., (1990) Psychological conditions of personal engagement

and disengagement at work, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 33,

Issue.4, pp.692-724.

Kahn. A., (1992) To be fully there: psychological present at work,

Human Relations, Vol. 45, Issue. 4, pp. 321-49.

Kaplan, H.R., Tausky, C. & Bolaria, B.S., (1969) Job Enrichment,

Personnel Journal, Vol. 48, Issue. 10, pp.791-798.

Kotler, P. & Armstrong, G., (2004) Principles of Marketing, New

Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.

Kular, S., Gatenby, M., Rees, C., Soane, E., & Truss, K., (2008)

Employee Engagement: A Literature Review, Working Paper Series,

No. 19, London, Kingston Business School, Kingston University.

Levinson, H., Price, C.R., Munden, K.J. & Solley, C.M., (1962) Men,

Management and Mental Health, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Press in Cullinane, N. & Dundon, T., (2006) The psychological

contract: A critical review, International Journal of Management

Reviews, Vol. 8, Issue. 2, pp. 113-129.

Linda Holbeche, L. & Springett, N., ( 2003) In Search of Meaning in the

Workplace, roffeypark.com, Available from

http://www.roffeypark.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/Research%20Rep

orts/meaning.pdf [Accessed 17th June 2011]

Locke, E.A., (1968) Toward a theory of task motivation and

incentives, Organisational Behaviour and Human Performance, Vol. 3,

Issue.1, pp.157-89.

81
 Maslach, C., Schaufelli, W.B. & Leiter, M.P., (2001) Job Burnout,

Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 52, Issue. 1, pp.397-422.

May, D.R., Gilson, R.L. & Harter, L.M., (2004) The Psychological

conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the

engagement of the human spirit at work, Journal of Occupational and

Organisational Psychology, Vol. 77, Issue. 1, pp. 11-37.

Mayo, A., (2001) The Human Value of the Enterprise: Valuing People

as Assets- Monitoring, Measuring, Managing, London, Nicholas

Brealey.

Merton, R.K. (1957) Social Theory and Social Structure. New York,

Free Press of Glencoe in Ferguson, A. (2007) Employee engagement:

Does it exist, and if so, how does it relate to performance, other

constructs and individual differences? [online] Available at:

http://www.lifethatworks.com/Employee-Engagement.prn.pdf

[Accessed 29th June 2011]

Miller, R. & Wurzburg, G., (1995) Investing in human capital, The

OECD Observer, Vol. A, Issue. 193, p.16.

Ott, B., (2007) Investors take note: Engagement boosts earnings, The

Gallup Management Journal, [Internet] Available from

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=7c2700be-

80dd-4927-ade3-145d3e7637e3%40sessionmgr12&vid=4&hid=10

[Accessed 21st June 2011].

Pfeffer, J., (1998) Human Equation Building Profits by Putting People

First, Harvard Business Press, USA.

82
 Pollard, S. (1968), The Genesis of Modern Management, Penguin,

Harmondsworth in Whitston, C., (2005) Module 3: Employers and the

management of labour, Section 3: Theories for explaining and managing

workers behaviour, MA in HRM, Keele University- Centre for

Industrial Relations.

Robinson, D., Perryman, S. and Hayday, S., (2004) The Drivers of

Employment Engagement, Brighton, Institute for Employment Studies.

Robinson, J., (2006) A Caterpillar Dealer Unearths Employee

Engagement, Gallup Management Journal, Vol. 8, Issue. 10, pp. 1-3.

[Online] Available from

http://gmj.gallup.com/content/24874/Caterpillar-Dealer-Unearths-

Employee- Engagement.aspx [Accessed 16th June 2011]

Roethlisberger, F. and Dickson, W. (1939), Management and the

Worker, Harvard University Press, Cambridge Mass in Whitston, C.,

(2005) Module 3: Employers and the management of labour, Section 3:

Theories for explaining and managing workers behaviour, MA in

HRM, Keele University- Centre for Industrial Relations.

Rose, M. (1988), Industrial Behaviour, 2nd edn, Penguin,

Harmondsworth (pp.2335) in Whitston, C., (2005) Module 3:

Employers and the management of labour, Section 3: Theories for

explaining and managing workers behaviour, MA in HRM, Keele

University- Centre for Industrial Relations.

83
 Saks, A.M., (2006) Antecedents and consequences of employee

engagement, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 21, Issue. 6, pp.

600-619.

Schein, E.H., (1978) Career Dynamics: Matching Individual and

Organisational Needs, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley in Cullinane, N.

& Dundon, T., (2006) The psychological contract: A critical review,

International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 8, Issue. 2, pp. 113-

129.

Sirota, D., Mischkind, L.A. & Meltzer, M.I., (2005) The Enthusiastic

Employee How Companies Profit by Giving Workers What They Want,

US, Wharton School Publishing.

Slater, P.E. (1966) Microcosms. New York, Wiley in Ferguson, A.

(2007) Employee engagement: Does it exist, and if so, how does it

relate to performance, other constructs and individual differences?

[online] Available at: http://www.lifethatworks.com/Employee-

Engagement.prn.pdf [Accessed 29th June 2011]

Smith, D. & Cantrell, S.M., (2011) The new rules of engagement:

treating your workforce as a workforce of one, Strategic HR Review,

Vol. 10, Issue. 3, pp. 5-11.

Smith, K.K. and Berg, D.N. (1987) Paradoxes of Group Life. San

Francisco, Jossey-Bass in Ferguson, A. (2007) Employee engagement:

Does it exist, and if so, how does it relate to performance, other

constructs and individual differences? [online] Available at:

http://www.lifethatworks.com/Employee-Engagement.prn.pdf

[Accessed 29th June 2011]

84
 Sveiby, K., (1997) The New Organisational Wealth: Managing and

Measuring Knowledge-Based Assets, San Francisco, Berett-Koehler.

The Gallup Organisation, (2004). www.gallup.com.

Towers Perrin (2003) Working Today: Understanding What Drives

Employee Engagement in www.towersperrin.com. Available from

http://www.towersperrin.com/tp/getwebcachedoc?webc=hrs/usa/2003/2

00309/talent_2003.pdf [Accessed 21st June 2011].

Truss, C., Soane, E., Edwards, C., Wisdom, K., Croll, A. & Burnett, J.,

(2006) Working Life: Employee Attitudes and Engagement 2006,

London, CIPD.

Woodward, J. (1965), Industrial Organization: Theory and Practice,

Oxford University Press, Oxford in Whitston, C., (2005) Module 3:

Employers and the management of labour, Section 3: Theories for

explaining and managing workers behaviour, MA in HRM, Keele

University- Centre for Industrial Relations.

Yankelovich, D., & Immerwahr, J. (1984) Putting the work ethic to

work. Society, (JanFeb), 5877 in Lloyd, R., (2008) Discretionary

Effort and the Performance Domain, The Australian and New Zealand

Journal of Organisational Psychology, Vol. 1. pp. 22-34. [Internet]

Available from http://www.atypon-

link.com/AAP/doi/pdf/10.1375/ajop.1.1.22?cookieSet=1 [Accessed 29th

June 2011].

85
 Appendix

Appendix 1.0

Engagement By Ages Detailed Breakdown

Cognitively Engaged 18-24 Engaged Disengaged

I often think about other things when I'm performing my job 50% 50%

I am rarely distracted when performaing my job 39% 61%

Emotionally Engaged 18-24 Engaged Disengaged

I really put my heart into my job 71% 29%

I get excited when I perform well in my job 57% 43%

I often feel no emotion when I perform my job 86% 14%

Physically Engaged 18-24 Engaged Disengaged

I exert a lot of energy doing my job 69% 31%

I avoid working overtime whenever possible 68% 32%

I stay until the job is done 82% 18%

I avoid working too hard 79% 21%

Cognitively Engaged 25-31 Engaged Disengaged

I often think about other things when I'm performing my job 54% 56%

I am rarely distracted when performaing my job 43% 57%

86
Emotionally Engaged 25-31 Engaged Disengaged

I really put my heart into my job 89% 11%

I get excited when I perform well in my job 82% 18%

I often feel no emotion when I perform my job 61% 39%

Physically Engaged 25-31 Engaged Disengaged

I exert a lot of energy doing my job 53% 47%

I avoid working overtime whenever possible 46% 54%

I stay until the job is done 82% 18%

I avoid working too hard 71% 29%

Cognitively Engaged 32-52 Engaged Disengaged

I often think about other things when I'm performing my job 44% 56%

I am rarely distracted when performaing my job 44% 56%

Emotionally Engaged 32-52 Engaged Disengaged

I really put my heart into my job 56% 44%

I get excited when I perform well in my job 33% 63%

I often feel no emotion when I perform my job 56% 44%

Physically Engaged 32-52 Engaged Disengaged

I exert a lot of energy doing my job 56% 44%

I avoid working overtime whenever possible 56% 44%

I stay until the job is done 78% 22%

I avoid working too hard 67% 33%

87
Cognitively Engaged Total By Age Engaged Disengaged

I often think about other things when I'm performing my job 49% 54%

I am rarely distracted when performaing my job 42% 58%

Emotionally Engaged Total By Age Engaged Disengaged

I really put my heart into my job 72% 28%

I get excited when I perform well in my job 57% 41%

I often feel no emotion when I perform my job 68% 32%

Physically Engaged Total By Age Engaged Disengaged

I exert a lot of energy doing my job 59% 41%

I avoid working overtime whenever possible 57% 43%

I stay until the job is done 81% 19%

I avoid working too hard 72% 28%

Appendix 2.0 Management Engagement Levels Breakdown

Cognitively Engaged Management Engaged Disengaged

I often think about other things when I'm performing my job 63% 37%

I am rarely distracted when performaing my job 63% 37%

Average 63% 37%

Emotionally Engaged Management Engaged Disengaged

I really put my heart into my job 88% 12%

I get excited when I perform well in my job 88% 12%

I often feel no emotion when I perform my job 88% 12%

Average 88% 12%

88
Physically Engaged Management Engaged Disengaged

I exert a lot of energy doing my job 75% 25%

I avoid working overtime whenever possible 50% 50%

I stay until the job is done 75% 25%

I avoid working too hard 88% 12%

Average 72% 28%

Management Engagement Engaged Disengaged

Cognitive Engagement 63% 37%
Emotional Engagement 88% 12%
Physical Engagement 72% 28%
Total 74% 26%

89
Appendix 3.0 Employee Engagement Survey

Dear Colleague,

I am currently studying for Masters Degree in Human Resources. In

order to
successfully finish my course I have to complete a thesis. The subject
matter I have chosen is to measure how engaged are my colleagues
working in their respective Topaz service stations within the south
Dublin region.

Just X the boxes accurately. The first answer that comes into your head
is usually the most heartfelt and honest. You are possibly sick and tired
of getting surveys but please just one more time. The more replies I get
the more valuable the results will be and the more analysis I can do, so I
am depending on you.
I would be most grateful if you could complete the questionnaire as soon
as possible as I am working to a very tight deadline.

Some of the questions are sensitive but I can assure you that all replies
will be kept under lock and key by me and I can guarantee that nobody
other than me will have access. Once I am finished I will destroy the
documentation and I am guaranteeing that no individual will be
identifiable in any of the results. However, if you wish to put your name
and e-mail at the end of the questionnaire I will forward you a personal
copy of my findings. Thank you in anticipation of your co-operation.

Robert Knight

Sales Assistant,

Topaz Rochestown.

90
Engagement Questionnaire for Topaz South Dublin Employees
YOUR WORKING LIFE
Q1 When you get up in the morning, how often do you really look forward to going to work?
PLEASE TICK
All of the time
Most of the time
Sometimes
Rarely
Never

Q2a Thinking about the last few weeks, how much of the time has your job made you feel each of the
following? PLEASE TICK
Tense Miserable Optimistic Calm Worried Enthused
All of the time
Most of the time
Sometimes
Rarely
Never

Q3 Please state the extent to which you agree with the following statements about your work
PLEASE TICK
Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly
Disagree agree nor Agree
disagree
My job activities are personally meaningful
The work I do on my job is of value to me
The work I do on my job is of value to Topaz

YOUR EMPLOYER
Q4 Now please talk about Topaz PLEASE TICK
How would you speak of this organization as an employer to people outside the organization?
I would speak highly of my organization without being asked
I would speak highly of my organization if asked
I would be neutral towards my organization
I would be critical of m organization if asked
I would be critical of m organization without being asked

Q5 Are you proud to tell people who you work for? Would you say you are..... PLEASE TICK
Very proud indeed
Proud
Quite Proud
Not very proud
Not proud at all

Q6 Which of these statements best describes your views on working for Topaz? PLEASE TICK
I'm not really interested in my organization, it's just a job
I like to know what's going on, but I don't like to get involved
I like to know what's going on and would like to get more involved
I like to know what's going on and I am involved

91
Q7 How much loyalty would you say you feel towards your ..... PLEASE TICK
Topaz Supervisor Manager Co-worker Customer
No loyalty at all
Only a little loyalty
Some loyalty
A lot of loyalty
Don't know

Q8 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following: PLEASE TICK
Neither
Strongly agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
Disagree non Agree
disagree
I would recommend Topaz to someone who
seeks my advice about a job opportunity
I would encourage my friends and family to do
business with Topaz

YOUR JOB
Q9 To what extent do you agree od disagree with the following statements about your job?

Neither
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Agree nor Agree
Disagree Agree
Disagree

I often think about other things when I'm

performing my job
I am rarely distracted when performing my job
I really put my heart into my job
I get excited when I perform well in my job
I often feel no emotion when I perform my job
I exert a lot of energy doing my job
I avoid working overtime whenever possible
I stay until the job is done
How I perform in my job effect how I feel
I avoid working too hard

Q10 In general would you say that your job is.... PLEASE TICK
Not at all stressful
Mildly stressful
Moderately stressful
Very stressful
Extremely stressful

Q11 Approximately how much of the time do you feel under excessive pressure in your job?
PLEASE TICK
Never
Once or twice a month
Once or twice a week
Everyday

92
Q12 How much control do you feel you have over the way you do your job? PLEASE TICK
A great deal of control
A fair amount of control
Not much control
Just a little control
No control

Q13a Thinking about the balance between your work life and your home life, to what extent do you
agree or disagree with each of the following? PLEASE TICK
I achieve the correct balance between my home and work lives
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neither agree non disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree

Q13b Topaz provides support to help me manage my work-life balance PLEASE TICK
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neither agree non disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree

JOB SATISFACTION
Q14 Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied would you say you are with your current job? PLEASE TICK
Very dissatisfied
Dissatisfied
Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
Satisfied
Very satisfied

Q15 To what extent do you agree od disagree with the following statements about your job?
Neither
Strongly Satisfied
Dissatisf- Very
Dissatisfie or Satisfied
ied Satisfied
d Dissatisfie
d
I have the knowledge and skills that I need to do
my work to a high standard
My work is of excellent quality
Overall, I perform to the best of my ability

93
Q16 To what extent do you agree od disagree with the following statements about your job?
Neither
Strongly Satisfied
Dissatisf- Very
Dissatisfie or Satisfied
ied Satisfied
d Dissatisfie
d
The physical working conditions
The freedom to choose your own way of working
Relations with your fellow workers
The recognition you get for good work
Your immediate boss
The amount of responsibility you are given
Your rate of pay
Your opportunity to use your abilities
The way YOUR station is managed
Your chances of promotion
The attention paid to the suggestions you make
The amount of variety in your job
Your job security
Relations between employees and managers

Q17 Overall, how do you think that your performance at work compares with others doing a similar
job? PLEASE TICK
My performance is much lower
My performance is lower
My performance is about the same as other people in a similar role
My performance is higher
My performance is much higher
Don't know

YOUR LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT

Q18 To what extent do you agree od disagree with the following statements about your job?
Always Usually Sometimes Rarely Never
Consults me on matters of importance to me
Discusses my training and development needs with me
Recognises when I have done a good job
Makes me feel my work counts
Gives me feedback on how I am performing
Is open and honest
Keeps me in touch with what's going on
Is supportive if I have a problem
Makes clear what is expected of me
Listens if I have a suggestion to make
Treats me fairly

94
COMMUNICATION AT TOPAZ

Q19 How well informed do you feel about what is happening within YOUR STATION? PLEASE TICK
My business unit keeps me fully informed
My business unit keeps me fairly informed
My business unit only gives me a limited amount of information
My business unit doesn't tell me much about what is going on
Don't know / No opinion

Q20 To what extent do you believe the information you receive about what is happening within
YOUR STATION? PLEASE TICK
I can always believe it
I can usually believe it
I can believe it about half of the time
I can seldom believe it
I can never believe it

Q21 How satisfied are you with the opportunities that exist to feed your views/ideas/issues
upwards? PLEASE TICK
Very dissatisfied
Dissatisfied
Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
Satisfied
Very satisfied

Q22 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following:

I would be confidant that, if I had a problem at work, it would be dealt with fairly PLEASE TICK
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Agree
Strongly agree

THE FUTURE

Q23 Within the next year, in your job, do you intend to: PLEASE TICK
Stay where you are in your current job
Gain upward promotion to a higher level
Move to a position of similar responsibility in another area of your company
None of the above/other
Don't Know

Q24 Do you plan to remain with Topaz for the foreseeable future? PLEASE TICK
Yes
No
Don't Know

95
Q25 Have you ever thought about or done anything to leave your current job?
Which of following statements best describes your situation? PLEASE TICK
I have never even thought about leaving this job
I sometimes thought about leaving this job but never did
I have looked around for other jobs
I am currently in the process of looking for another job

Q26 If you intend to leave your job within the next year, what are your reasons? PLEASE TICK
To find a different job within the organization
To find another similar job within another organization
To do a different type of work
To be self-employed
To retire
To return to full time study
To care for your children
To care for other dependents
Job satisfaction
Better pay/benefits elsewhere
Opportunities for promotion
Easier/shorter journey to work
More flexible working hours
Other reasons

Any comments you wish to make:

96
97