THESIS Psychological Meaningfulness and Work Engag PDF

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 72

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/333557140

THESIS Psychological Meaningfulness and Work Engagement of Filipino


Millennials

Thesis · December 2017


DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30451.89123

CITATIONS READS
0 684

4 authors, including:

Mark Kristian Viernes Blando


De La Salle University
4 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Psychological Meaningfulness and Work Engagement of Filipino Millennials View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mark Kristian Viernes Blando on 02 June 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT i
OF FILIPINO MILLENNIALS

Psychological Meaningfulness and Work Engagement for Filipino Millennials

A Thesis
Presented to the
Faculty of the
Department of Psychology
College of Liberal Arts
De La Salle University

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the
Degree in Bachelor of Arts
Major in Psychology

By

Blando, Mark Kristian V.


Bernardo, Stephanie Estella G.
Lim, Kathrine Angela O.
Lim, Lizette P.

December 13, 2017


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT ii
OF FILIPINO MILLENNIALS

Acknowledgement

The researchers would like to express their deepest gratitude to De La Salle


University for the opportunities given to them. Being in the university helped them hone
themselves into becoming the achievers that they are today. The researchers would also
like to thank Ms. Jaymee Pantaleon for guiding the researchers during their Thesis 1 and
Dr. Lloyd Espiritu for his mentoring for the second part of their Thesis journey. Lastly, the
researchers would like to thank their friends and families for their cast iron support for the
duration of their Thesis period.
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT iii
OF FILIPINO MILLENNIALS

Abstract

This study investigates on the experience of psychological


meaningfulness and work engagement of Filipino millennials
in the workplace. Specifically, to what extent do millennials
experience both psychological meaningfulness and work
engagement and the relationship of both. psychological
meaningfulness is measured by three indicators namely,
recognition, challenge, and perceived meaningfulness of
contribution (Brown and Leigh, 1996). While, work
engagement is also measured by three indicators namely,
vigor, absorption, and dedication (Salanova et al, 2002). With
regards to our participants, the millennials are divided into 2
groups, older millennials who were born in 1981-1989 and
younger millennials who were born in 1990-1997 (Pew
Research Center, 2015). In this study, the researchers found
out millennials, especially the older millennials, crave
psychological meaningfulness in the workplace which will
result to work engagement; having the contribution as the
strongest predictor in work engagement. These findings can
be beneficial to a lot especially to human resources
practitioners, employers, developmental psychology, etc.

Keywords: millennials-psychological meaningfulness-work

engagement
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT iv
OF FILIPINO MILLENNIALS

Table of Contents

Page

Title Page i
Acknowledgment ii
Abstract iii
Table of Contents iv
List of Tables v
List of Figures vi

Chapter 1: Introduction 1
Background of the Study 1
Review of Related Literature 3
Millennials 3
Psychological Meaningfulness (PM) 7
Work Engagement (WE) 10
Relationship between PM and WE 13
Synthesis 14
Theoretical/Conceptual Framework 15
Statement of the Problem 17
Hypotheses 16
Definition of Terms 18
Significance of the Study 19
Scope and Delimitation 21

Chapter 2: Methodology 22
Research Design 22
Population and Sample 22
Sampling Design 23
Instruments 23
Data Gathering 24
Data Preparation 25
Data Analysis 25
Methodological Limitations 25
Ethical Considerations 26

Chapter 3: Results 28
Demographic Information 28
Main findings 30
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT v
OF FILIPINO MILLENNIALS

Chapter 4: Discussion 29
Psychological meaningfulness for Millennials 33
Work Engagement for Millennials 34
Psychological Meaningfulness and Work Engagement 38

Chapter 5: Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations 40


Summary 40
Conclusions 42
Recommendations 43

References 47

Appendix:
Consent form 53
Study scales 55
Other findings 58
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT vi
OF FILIPINO MILLENNIALS

List of Tables
Page
Table 1. Frequency Distribution of the Sample Population 26
Table 2. Descriptive Statistics for Psychological 27
Meaningfulness

Table 3. Descriptive Statistics for Work Engagement 28


Table 4. Correlation for Psychological Meaningfulness and
Work Engagement 29

List of Figures

Page

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework 16


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 1
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Chapter 1
Introduction
Background of the Study

More than half of the people in the world will spend a third of their adult lives

working (WHO, 1995). Many strive hard to find jobs and do well enough in it to suit their

needs. For some, work is a means to an end: it allows people to provide for themselves and

their family, to attain material or monetary rewards, and even achieve financial stability so

that they can live a comfortable life. For others, work can also be an end in itself: work can

provide individuals with a sense of worth and purpose through opportunities for personal

and professional self-improvement, or ways to contribute meaningfully to society.

For millennials, self-improvement is vastly important – opportunity for progression

was noted in a research study by PWC as a top reason for an employer to be appealing

(2011, p. 10). Millennials are the largest generation in the workforce, and they are

persistent in seeking out great opportunities to grow and rise up the ladder – even if that

means leaving one job for another (Fromm, 2015). Millennials are motivated to work by

the thought of being able to make a difference, by getting the chance to learn and grow

(Cecilia, 2016). It could be said that they are career makers because they are concerned

with occupational advancement. A survey was conducted by Philippine Daily Inquirer on

what Filipino Millennials were looking for in a job and most of the answers yielded were

about self-improvement, that they wanted a workplace that had a good culture, a place
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 2
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

where they can learn and bring out their full potentials (Mamuyac, 2016). It is essential for

them to be in an organization that allows them to grow and learn new things. However,

once they feel that they have learned everything there is to learn, they leave. Millennials are

widely known for being ―job hoppers‖, meaning, they keep on switching from one job to

the other and most of the time only lasting a few months before they switch again. The

consistent switching is powered by the absence of self-improvement fueled by training and

coaching the company provides, meaning to say, they no longer feel that they are learning

anything new and as a result they leave the company and apply to other organizations to

gain new experiences. It is important for them to find reason in what they do. According to

Philippine Daily Inquirer’s survey, ―62 percent of Filipino millennials say their leadership

skills are not being fully developed in their current organization while 61 percent feel that

they are being overlooked for potential leadership positions‖ (Dumlao, 2016). If they feel

that they are being underutilized and undervalued by their organization, these millennial

employees would feel dissatisfied with their jobs which can result to them being

disengaged in their work. Nearly 70% of millennials were disengaged at work, according to

Gallup (2016). Being engaged in one’s work is important because it is what drives the

behaviors of the employees, whether they would exhibit organizationally fit behaviors or be

a slacker who delivers half-baked outputs. The success of a company is not solely

determined by its profits but also by the performance of its employees. Organizations need

to ensure that the work environment ensues work engagement so that the employees can
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 3
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

find motivation to perform well, not solely for the wellbeing of the individual but for the

organization as well.

Given that millennials will comprise majority of the global workforce by the year

2025 and a third of the Philippine nation is already comprised of millennials, it is important

to gain a better understanding of what they value as a generation (EY, 2015, p.1; de la

Cruz, 2015). Millennials are known to be purpose-driven individuals and strive to find

meaning in what they do, to be engaged in one’s work is to find meaning and purpose in it;

however, meaning and purpose is not the same for everyone and there are factors that can

influence search and acquisition of it. Thus, this study aimed to understand how much

Filipino millennials find meaning in their work, how engaged they are because of work,

and the relationship between psychological meaningfulness and work engagement.

Review of Related Literature

Millennials. The generation known as Millennials are comprised of those born in

the years 1981 to 1997 (Pew Research Center, 2015). In a report written by the Human

Resources Professionals Association or HRPA, millennials were said to be one of the most

misunderstood generations, when in reality, they want the same things as other generational

cohorts. Millennials are often viewed negatively because of the generational differences

which lead to misunderstanding and conflicts in the workplace (Dubé, 2017; Pew Research

Center, 2015). However, as the millennial generation is rapidly growing in the workforce,
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 4
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

there is a need to understand who the millennials are and how this generation can make an

impact through their respective jobs.

Older and Younger Millennials. In order to understand their characteristics, the

millennial generation may further be divided into two - the older millennials who are aged

28 to 36 and the younger millennials who are aged 20 to 27 (Pew Research Center, 2015).

The two major events that may separate these two generational subcohorts are the financial

crisis of 2008 and the rapid advancement of technology (Singal, 2017). Before the hit of the

2008 financial crisis, older millennials were already of age and either graduating from

college or working on their careers; this led them to be more traditional and realistic, as

well as financially-conscious. They tend to be more collaborative in order to get the job

done, and tend to seek meaning in ther jobs as well as the idealistic work-life balance.

Younger millennials on the other hand came of age after the 2008 Financial Crisis, having

only been students when it hit. They thus tend to be more idealistic and optimistic, but also

more practical, more attracted to industries with steady work and more willing to work

overtime. They also have a higher preference for environmental spending and spending for

others, placing less importance on material possessions (BridgeWorks, 2017; Hammer,

2015; Mang & Piper, 2012; Singal, 2017).

Characteristics. Although older and younger millennials may have some

differences, there are five pre-dominant themes common to all millennials: work-life

balance, good pay and benefits, opportunities for advancement, meaningful work
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 5
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

experiences, and nurturing work environment (Ng, Schweitzer & Lyons, 2010; Debevec,

Schewe, Madden & Diamond 2013). Millennials are also known to have high levels of self-

confidence, self-reliance, and self-esteem; thus, these may be the reasons as to why they

have high expectations of recognition or approval from their employers which led to the

name, ―Trophy Generation‖. They expect not only positive feedback but also negative

feedback so that they are more motivated to improve themselves; in comparison, older

generations understood praise as not being yelled at by their superiors (Ozcelik, 2015;

Meier, Austin and Crocker, 2010; Twenge and Campbell, 2008). They are also said to be

job-hoppers or uncommitted to their work since they value workplace relationship rather

than their organizations. For example, when a manager leaves the firm, his/her subordinates

will follow him/her to the next workplace (Ng, Schweitzer and Lyons, 2010). Another

reason is that they have seen their parents sacrifice themselves in their works for no direct

or immediate benefits and even got laid-off, hence they are skeptical of long-term

commitments (Kaifi, et.al., 2012). Furthermore, they are also not intimidated or impressed

with job titles and authority figures or superiors thus, in successful managing, employers

should raise or treat the millennials the way that their parents raised them (Tolbize, 2008)

In addition, millennials have high expectations when it comes to promotion or pay

and advancement. They expect to be promoted as quickly as possible with minimal effort

because of their contributions to the organization since the requirement for promotion or

raise have nothing to do with job performance (i.e. requirement of working 1 year in the
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 6
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

organization) and they expect their superiors to adapt new practices and leave the

traditional practices behind (Twenge and Campbell, 2008; Ozcelik, 2015; Meier, Austin

and Crocker, 2010; Ng, Schweitzer and Lyons, 2010). A good way to keep them satisfied is

through pay and advancements like, raising their salary by 1% three times a year rather

than increasing the salary by 3.5% at the end of the year. However, according to a study,

majority of the millennials do have some realistic expectations when it comes to initial pay

and first job because of economic realities. They also understand that their first job would

not be able to fulfill or satisfy their wants and needs, specifically psychological

meaningfulness (Ng, Schweitzer & Lyons, 2010).

Moreover, millennials crave meaningful and fulfilling work more than lucrative

paychecks - ―Work should not just be a way to make money but to provide a rich and

fulfilling experience‖ (Ozcelik, 2015; Tolbize, 2008; Bursch, 2014; Twenge and Campbell,

2008; Bano, Vyas and Gupta, 2015). It is also mentioned that millennials can not be happy

without seeing or feeling the significance of their work (i.e. working aimlessly does not

motivate them while, having a sense of purpose motivates them). Therefore, they prefer an

enjoyable, satisfying, and meaningful work rather than well-paid or career oriented work.

An example is that in the book, Quaterlife Crisis— a young woman wanted to quit her

dream job because it was not fulfilling. They also seek new opportunities, better benefits or

small perks (e.g. lunch out, free movie theater, etc), self-development, skills improvement,

challenging and meaningful work or assignments to stay motivated, learn, and be engaged
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 7
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

in their work rather than life-long employment (Ozcelik, 2015; Bursch, 2014; Meier,

Austin and Crocker, 2010; Twenge and Campbell, 2008; Huyler, et.al., n.d.). Moreover, it

is said in a study that vigor positively influences employee retention though it is the

millennials who have a higher tendency to leave the organization once there’s a lack of

vigor and deterioration of mental health. When their sense of significance, enthusiasm, and

challenge in their work is lost, their intention of leaving increases whereas, the job is

fulfilling and meaningful, the more that they are engaged and willing to stay (Park and

Gursoy, n.d.).

Psychological meaningfulness. Meaningfulness manifests in the meaning of work

and the psychological meaning of one's job (van Zyl, Deacon & Rothman, 2010). The

meaning of work is simply the general level of significance of one's work to his or her life.

It is finding meaning in the subjective experience of one's work. This general level of

importance of one's work has are three distinct dimensions: viewing work as a job, work as

a career, or work as a calling. To view one's work as a job is to be merely concerned with

the material or monetary rewards obtained. In other words, you work to live. On the other

hand, to view one's work as a career denotes that meaning is defined by the occupational

advancement the individual obtains. It manifests from the perceived power, influence and

higher social status they gain. Individuals who view their work as a career are found to be

happier than those who view their work as a job, but less so than those who view their work

as a calling. Viewing one's work as a calling implies that one feels that his or her life
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 8
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

purpose is to do work-related tasks. That he or she is born to work. These people acquire

fulfillment in doing work-related activities, rather than receiving monetary or material

rewards (work as a job) or career advancement (work as a career) (van Zyl, Deacon &

Rothman, 2010).

Psychological meaningfulness is one's value of a work goal or purpose. It refers to

"feeling that one is receiving a return on investments of one’s self in a currency of physical,

cognitive, or emotional energy‖ (Kahn, 1990; Jacobs, 2013). It is a state of mind in the

workplace that would ensue work motivation leading to a better job performance. Work

engagement is influenced by the meaning that employees attach to their job. Employees

who found meaning in their work tend to perform better and are more engaged in their

work. In contrast, those who don't find meaning in their work tend to become 'alienated' or

disengaged from one's work (Aktouf, 1992; May, Gilson & Harter, 2004). Individuals play

different roles in their everyday lives, hence, their "self-in-roles" are carried out in varying

degrees and are constructed according to the role they play (Kahn, 1990). They alter their

demeanors in order to match with the task behaviors that their role in work demands.

Personal Engagement refers to "the simultaneous employment and expression of a person's

"preferred self" in task behaviors that promote connections to work and to others, personal

presence (physical, cognitive, and emotional), and active, full role performances" (Kahn,

1990). Meaning to say, expressing one's preferred self-in-role allows the individual to fully

express his thoughts, feelings, and values freely in his work. It is also possible to
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 9
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Personally Disengage, in which the individual withdraws himself from his preferred self to

reduce physical, emotional, and cognitive presence. When personal disengagement occurs,

individuals become robotic and would hide their true identity and mask their thoughts and

feelings in performing their roles (Kahn, 1990).

Indicators of psychological meaningfulness. According to Kahn (1990), the

presence of recognition from the organization, perceived meaningfulness of one’s

contributions, and challenge that the work can bring are all indicators of psychological

meaningfulness.

Recognition is the belief that one’s efforts are recognized by the organization

thereby resulting to perceived meaningfulness (Brown & Leigh, 1996). It is when an

employee feels appreciated or valued by the organization when their accomplishments and

hard work are acknowledged. This recognition would lead them to be encouraged and more

involved in their work.

Perceived meaningfulness of contribution is one’s perception of how their work has

a significant impact on the organization at large, which enables them to identify with their

work role. It is the feeling that one’s work or contributions positively affect the

organization (Brown & Leigh, 1996). It is when an employee feels that they contribute to

the organization’s progress or development that they experience perceived meaningfulness.


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 10
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Challenge is when an employee feels the need to use their emotional, physical, and

cognitive resources in their work in order for them to have personal growth within the

organization (Brown & Leigh, 1996). The employee must feel that their work requires them

to exert more effort and be creative and resourceful in performing tasks assigned to them.

Only then will they be able to feel challenged and have some sense of personal growth.

Work engagement. As defined by Salanova, González-Romá, & Bakker (2002),

work engagement is a ―positive, fulfilling, affective-motivational state of work-related

well-being‖ comprised of three components: vigor, dedication, and absorption. This is

similar to Kahn’s (1990) original conceptualization of personal engagement - people who

are engaged physically, cognitively, and emotionally to certain outputs harness themselves

positively in relation to their role. Work engagement focuses on the psychological state a

person has in relation to one’s work, unlike the conception of employee engagement which

tends to factor in the relationship of an employee with his or her organization; this allows

for work engagement to avoid overlapping with similar concepts such as organizational

commitment and extra-role behavior and enables it to be properly measured and researched

(Schaufeli & Bakker, 2010; Bakker, Schaufeli, Leiter, & Taris, 2008). Work engagement is

also distinct from other concepts such as flow, workaholism, and burnout (Schaufeli &

Bakker, 2010 Bakker et. al, 208; Mäkikangas et al, 2013).

Indicators of work engagement. The experience of vigor, absorption, and

dedication in relation to one’s work are all indications of one’s work engagement. The
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 11
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

presence of all three indicators is requisite in order to distinguish the person’s experience as

work engagement.

Vigor is the behavioral-energetic component of work engagement, entails positive,

intense energy, effort, and persistence directed towards work. This is what allows an

individual to keep up even when work gets hectic. It is considered the opposite of

exhaustion, a dimension of burnout. Unlike an engaged individual who exhibits high

energy, a burned-out individual is less resilient to the stress that one’s work entails.

Dedication is the emotional component, involves a strong sense of involvement

with the work that one does as characterized by feelings of enthusiasm, inspiration, pride,

and challenge. On the opposite end is cynicism, another dimension of burnout (Schaufeli &

Bakker, 2010). An engaged individual views his or her work positively and tends to

identify with it, whereas a burned out individual may see it as a burdensome task.

Absorption is the cognitive component, is the person’s experience of full

concentration and enjoyable engrossment in work, which may lead one to prioritize his or

her work above all other things. This is likened to the experience of flow, which entails

bursts of high productivity related to what one enjoys doing and reluctance to leave it;

however, work engagement is a longer lasting state. Additionally, while a high level of

absorption is involved in both work engagement and workaholism, these two do not co-

occur in an individual and are thus noted to be empirically distinct (Bakker et. al, 2008;

Mäkikangas, Schaufeli, Tolvanen, & Feldt, 2013). A workaholic may feel compelled to
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 12
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

keep working because they have to, while an engaged individual experiences absorption

because they are actually interested in their work.

Effects of work engagement. In the past years, study about work engagement in

the field of industrial psychology has been prevalent. The studies are not only about the

definition or the conceptual framework of work engagement, but previous studies in work

engagement also examined the effects of work engagement to an individual. Most of the

studies the researchers have read suggest that work engagement can both affect employees’

performance, subjective well-being, and can lessen the risk of getting burnout.

Previous study of effects of work engagement in burnout (Gutib et al., 2016;

Schaufeli et al.,2002) suggested that engagement can help employees protect themselves

from burnout. Work engagement helps them to deal with work related stress (Schaufeli et

al., 2002). The relationship between burnout and work engagement in previous study was

negative, which means that employees who scored high in burnout scored low in work

engagement. This means that if an employee is highly engaged with his work then the

possibility of getting mentally and physically exhausted is low (Schaufeli and Bakker,

2004). It was later supported by another study about work happiness as a function of

enduring burnout and work engagement (Bakker and Oerlemans, 2016), it was found out

that employees who experience high work engagement in their job are happier compared to

employees who experience low work engagement. Bakker and Oerlemans (2016), added
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 13
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

that employees who are happier can satisfy their own basic Psychological needs thus, the

risk of getting burnout is lessened.

Another study about the effects of work engagement (De Neve, 2017) noted that an

employee who has been actively and highly engaged with his work will be more assume

difficult tasks, will be more committed to advancing or promoting the company’s interests,

and it was also noted that actively engaged employees are more satisfied with their job and

more likely to have a positive affect compared to disengaged employees.

It was also noted by some researchers that work engagement has a connection with

employees’ job performance (Rich, Lepine, and Crawford, 2010). They argued that

engagement reflects human agency, thus work engagement can produce outcomes that are

beneficial to both company and employee, like productivity, efficiency, and quality. In

addition, it was noted that employees who are highly engaged in their work or job are more

productive, they are not only physically energetic, they are also cognitively vigilant and

emotionally connected to their work. Compared to the employees who are not highly

engaged in their work showed a robotic, passive, and detached in their work (Rich, Lepine,

and Crawford, 2010; Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995; Kahn, 1990).

Relationship between psychological meaningfulness and work engagement.

Alongside the psychological conditions of safety and availability, Kahn (1990) first

identified psychological meaningfulness as a potential antecedent of engagement. Several

studies have since explored the relationship of psychological meaningfulness and work
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 14
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

engagement (May, Gilson, & Harter, 2004; Olivier & Rothmann, 2007; Woods & Sofat,

2013; Geldenhuys, Laba & Venter, 2014). Results from a survey of 415 employees from

Gauteng, South Africa showed that psychological meaningfulness and work engagement

were linked, with work engagement influencing the relationship between psychological

meaningfulness and positive organizational commitment (Geldenhuys et. al, 2014). Woods

and Sofat (2013) also found that psychological meaningfulness mediated the work

engagement of industrious and assertive individuals. Another study showed that job

enrichment and work role fit affected psychological meaningfulness, which in turn,

influenced work engagement (May et. al, 2004). Finding meaning in one’s work was still

found to strongly predict work engagement, and mediate its relationship with work role fit

(Olivier & Rothmann, 2007). To further explain this, individuals always strive to feel that

meaningfulness in work that they do, to feel that they are doing the things that they do for a

purpose. In the world of work, meaningfulness is influenced tasks that is challenging; a

task or work that varies and a work that will allow humans whatever skills or resources

they have (Saks 2006; Kahn 1992). Experiencing a challenging work leads to a sense of

meaningfulness and meaningfulness leads to engagement at work (Saks 2006). When

someone also do a task or job and felt useful and valuable he and it was recognized by the

organization where he/she belongs to, the likelihood an employee will be more engaged in

his/her work is higher (Saks 2006; Kahn 1991). This is because when the organization give

recognition and rewards to their employees, their employees will feel obliged to get more

engaged with their work to further improve their job performance.


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 15
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Synthesis

The millennial generation or the generation born between the years of 1981-1997

(Pew Research Center 2015) is a trending subject research in different fields of social

sciences for the past years. But most of us did not know that millennials are also composed

of two groups; the younger millennials or those who were born between the years of 1990-

1997, and older Millennials or those who were born between the years of 1981-1989

(PwRC 2015).

Millennials, are often also misunderstood for being lazy, entitled, and complacent

with regards to work attitudes. This notion manifested from the performance of millennial

employees in the workplace. They appear to easily get bored or lose interest in their work,

which prompts them to quit their jobs after only a few months or so. The fact is that

millennials look for challenge, they want some sense of significance in their work or the

sense of contribution to the company, and in return they also want the organization to give

them feedback or recognition. Surprisingly, these factors were the indicators identified in

the study conducted by Brown and Leigh (1996). Psychological meaningfulness was also

identified as the strongest predictor of work engagement (May et al 2004), which means

when they experience meaningfulness in what they do, they become more absorbed,

vigorous, and dedicated at work. These factors (absorption, vigor, and dedication) are the

three indicators of Work Engagement (Salanova et al 2002).


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 16
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Although, there are several studies about millennials at workplace, psychological

meaningfulness, and work engagement have been published, there are still lack of study

about the psychological meaningfulness and work engagement of millennials most

especially in the Philippines; a local study about these variables that can prove or disprove

global trends. In line with this, the researchers think that this study is and relevant to the

Filipino workplace in general.

Conceptual Framework

Figure 1. Conceptual framework showing that psychological meaningfulness


predicts work engagement amongst Filipino millennials.
The conceptual framework presented defines the population group of the study,

which are Filipino millennials who were born between the period of 1981-1997 (ages 21-36

years old). The researchers based this age group on their study of literature (Park &

Gursoy, nd; Meier, Austin, and Crocker, 2010; Samina, Kriti, & Robini, 2015). The

millennials will also be divided into two groups based on Pew Research Center (2015);

younger millennials who were born in the period of 1990-1997, and older millennials who

were born in the period of 1981-1989.


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 17
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

The psychological meaningfulness in this study will be measured by three

indicators; (1) perceived meaningfulness of contribution (2) Challenge, and (3) recognition

(Brown and Leigh, 1996). While work engagement will be measured using the three

indicators; (1) vigor, (2) absorption, and (3) dedication (Salanova et al, 2002). In previous

studies, psychological meaningfulness was positively and significantly correlated to work

engagement (May et al 2004; Kahn 1990). This is supported by a study of Olivier et al

(2007) they claimed that meaning in one’s work leads will make one engage in his/her

work. Thus, a person who experience meaningfulness at work by making making

meaningful contributions, facing challenging yet meaningful work, and being recognized

by their organization more engaged to his/her work

However, these findings are based on Western literatures, there are no available

studies about the relationship between the two variables - psychological meaningfulness

and work engagement in the Philippines. Thus, the researchers have decided to make a

study in Filipino Millennial employees about Psychological Meaningfulness and Work

Engagement relationship.

Statement of the Problem

This study aims to understand psychological meaningfulness and work engagement for the

Filipino millennial. As such, the researchers intend to address the following research

questions:
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 18
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

1. To what extent do millennials experience psychological meaningfulness?

2. To what extent do millennials experience work engagement?

3. What is the relationship between psychological meaningfulness and work

engagement?

Definition of Terms

Millennials. Millennials are people who are born in the year 1981 and 1997. For

the purpose of this study, all people born within these years are considered as millennials;

subclassifications of older millennials (those born in the years 1981 to 1989) and younger

millennials (those born in the years 1990 to 1997) will be used in order to compare their

levels of psychological meaningfulness and work engagement.

Psychological meaningfulness. Psychological meaningfulness is conceptually

defined as ―the value of a work goal or purpose‖ (Kahn, 1990). This was measured through

the Psychological Meaningfulness subscale taken from the Psychological Climate Scale.

Participants rated their work in terms of how meaningful it is to their life.

Work engagement. Work engagement is conceptually defined as the ―positive,

fulfilling, affective-motivational state of work-related well-being‖ comprised of three

components: vigor, dedication, and absorption (Salanova, González-Romá, & Bakker,

2002). It is the psychological state a person has in relation to one’s work. This was

measured using the Utretcht Work Engagement Scale (UWES). The participants rate how

often they feel a certain way at work on a 7-point likert scale.


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 19
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Significance of the Study

Given the good effects of both Psychological Meaningfulness and work

engagement in the literatures mentioned in the study and review of the related literature and

with the millennials taking over and majority of the workforce in different companies and

industries. The researchers think that this study will be relevant and will benefit not only

the millennials themselves, and the industries concerned, but also the different fields of

Psychology.

Millennials. This study will give them more understanding about themselves. The

study of psychological meaningfulness and work engagement will give them idea of what

are their strengths and weaknesses are, their purpose and meaning in life, and anything

connected with them finding the real essence of their job and how they can further improve

their skills to remain competent. As also mentioned in the effects of work engagement and

psychological meaningfulness, this study will also help them to find ways on how they can

remain engage in their works, understand why they are not happy with their job, and will

give them the importance of finding the right work or job that are in line with their skills

and talents.

Human resource practitioners. This study will have a big impact or effect to

Human Resource Industry. First, the focus of this study is about the millennials in

workplace, and as noted millennials has now many of the work force. Thus, this study will

give them ideas on how to handle millennials at work and how to properly address the
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 20
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

needs and demands of millennials. Lastly, Studying the benefits and effects of work

engagement and psychological meaningfulness can help them to identify different ways on

how to make their employees more engaged, productive, efficient, competent, and

enhancing the strengths of these employees that can help the success of their company.

Developmental psychology. Developmental psychology is a field in psychology

which uses scientific studies on how and why human beings change over the course of their

life. The subjects in this study are millennials or also known as the generation y. This study

can contribute in the field of developmental psychology by supporting or debunking

previous studies regarding the millennials.

Application of Positive Psychology in Industrial Psychology. The researchers

believe that this study will contribute to Industrial Psychology, a branch of Psychology that

focuses on workplace, environment, organizations, and their employees. This study of

Psychological Meaningfulness and Work Engagement in millennials can help people to

understand their strengths, purpose, and meaning in their workplace. Based on the literature

promoting these two concepts can help not only the individuals to thrive but also the

company. Which is also an indication that positive Psychology can be applied to the field

of Industrial Psychology. To just add, Positive Psychology is also an emerging field in

Psychology, and the main objective of Positive Psychology is the strengths of people that

helps individuals and communities to thrive. The foundation of this field is the belief that
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 21
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

people want to lead meaningful and fulfilling lives. In this study, thriving will be studied in

individual and industrial level.

Scope and Delimitation

The study focused on the concept of psychological meaningfulness and work

engagement. The study began on the first week of June and ended on the last week of

November. The target population are the Filipino millennials in the Philippines; however,

the study was conducted only amongst participants who were currently working in Metro

Manila at the time of the study in order to control for cultural differences. The population’s

age group was within the range of 21 to 36 years old to cover the span of the Millennial

generation. The scores of the older millennials or those born in 1981 to 1989 were

compared with that of the younger millennials or those born in 1990 to 1997 in order to

gain a better understanding of the possible similarities and differences that these

generational cohorts may have.

The study failed to account for the number of years the participant has been

working in their position or company given that the focus was on the generation of

millennials; it also does not cover a specific industry.


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 22
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Chapter 2
Methodology
Research Design

This study made use of a quantitative research design involving existing scales with

established psychometric properties to measure the desired variables, namely psychological

meaningfulness and work engagement. Correlational and linear analyses were used in order

to understand the relationship between the two variables and their indicators.

Population and sample

The participants were comprised of Filipino nationals who were currently working

in the area of Metro Manila, Philippines at the time of the study and are considered to be

part of the millennial generation, i.e. those born during the years 1981 to 1997 and are 20 to

36 years old (mean 25.190 years, SD = 3.929) at the time the study was conducted (Pew

Research Center, 2015). A total of 462 valid responses from participants were gathered,

with 348 females and 116 males. The jobs participants could be classified under six

categories: clerical workers, managers, professionals, service and sales workers,

technicians and associate professionals, and self-employed.

Sampling Design

The sampling design used was convenience sampling. Due to time constraints and

limited resources like a database for workers, the researchers opted for a convenient type of

sampling in order to reach a wider demographics by disseminating an online survey. The


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 23
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

researchers limited their participants to those born between the years 1981 to 1997, and are

working in Metro Manila.

Research Instruments

The questionnaire administered to the participants were divided into three parts.

The first part contained the informed consent and the demographics questionnaire including

name, age, company, position, email, contact number. The second part contained the scale

for Psychological Meaningfulness which is The Psychological Meaningfulness subscale

taken from the Psychological Climate Scale (2004) . The third part contained the scale for

Work Engagement which is the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES 2004). The two

scales were both established and widely-used scales that measured the desired construct.

Demographic profile sheet. The Demographics profile sheet was used to collect

statistical data of the population, which includes the participant's’ age, sex, year of birth,

and position. The profile sheet was used to ensure that the participants fit the required

participant criteria and analyze their data according to their differences.

Psychological meaningfulness subscale. The psychological meaningfulness

subscale (α = .903) was taken from the Psychological Climate Scale developed by Brown

and Leigh (2004) which was based of Kahn’s conceptualization of psychological

meaningfulness. It is a self-report 7 point likert scale on to what extent they agree with the

statement in each item. The scale assesses the 3 indicators; (a) recognition, (b) perceived
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 24
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

meaningfulness of contribution, and (c) challenge. It has consistent cronbach’s alpha or

correlation coefficients of .798 which means a high level of reliability. The higher the score

is, the more they experience meaningfulness.

Utretcht Work Engagement Scale (UWES). Utretcht Work Engagement Scale

(UWES) is a scale developed by Schaufeli and Bakker (2004), this scale was made to

measure work engagement of an individual. It is a self-report 7 point likert scale on level of

frequency. These assesses the three main components of work engagement; (a) vigor (b)

absorption and (c) dedication. Higher score in this scale indicates higher level of work

engagement. It has consistent cronbach’s alpha or correlation coefficients of .86 which

means a high level of reliability (Scheufeli and Bakker, 2003).

Data Gathering

The researchers used convenient sampling for the data gathering due to time

constraints. The two scales, demographic questions, and clause for informed consent were

included in an online survey form which was distributed through e-mail, private messaging,

and online postings on various social media sites. A physical form of the survey was also

distributed to various eligible participants. Data retrieved from both electronic and physical

responses were all included in a spreadsheet.


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 25
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Data Preparation

The data spreadsheet was first scrutinized for missing or invalid entries; as a result,

only 462 responses were left from 474 total respondents. Some demographic variables such

as year of birth and job positions were later reclassified into age group (i.e. old millennials,

born 1981 to 1989, and young millennials, born 1990 to 1997) and job category (i.e.

Managers, Professionals, Technicians and Associate Professionals, Services and Sales

Workers, Clerical Support Workers, and Self-Employed). The score for each subscale and

overall scale were computed based on their corresponding manuals and studies.

Data Analysis

The researchers tabulated the demographic information of all of the respondents,

specifically the year they were born, position in the company, and sex. Scores of the

respondents were computed through Excel based on the scale manual and corresponding

studies. In the first analysis, a linear regression was done by the researchers to identify if

there is a relationship between the two main variables, the psychological meaningfulness

(PM) and work engagement (WE). In the second analysis, a correlational test was done by

the researchers to identify how strong is the relationship between the two main variables.

Methodological Limitations

Online Data Gathering. The quantitative data gathering was done online to make

it more available to more respondents. However, the validity and reliability of the results
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 26
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

maybe compromised. Online surveys may lead to different confounding variables;

participants can randomly answer the scales without the researchers monitoring the test

administration, the different types and sizes of the computers also affect the results. As a

solution to this the researchers put random questions in between valid questions, this

helped the researchers detect if the participant is taking the test seriously.

Uneven distribution of population. The population of this study was unevenly

distributed with Older Millennials at N=104 while Younger Millennials is at N=358. Also,

the the number of participants per Job Category was unevenly distributed with Tech and

Associate as the highest at N=138, alongside Clerical at N=113.

Dual format of data gathering. Aside from using an online survey form, the

researchers also had forms printed out to disseminate to respondents in different companies

to efficiently gather respondents. This may have an effect on the testing conditions of the

participants as the environment was not controlled.

Ethical Considerations

Informed consent. The participants was informed of the purpose of the project and

the procedures conducted. They were given an informed consent form which contains the

tasks they need to do, what the research is for and how their answers will be utilized.

Voluntary participation. The participants have the right to refuse to participate in

the study, whether it had begun or not. If the subject feels uncomfortable with the
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 27
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

investigation to be conducted, the researchers will stop and the participant is free to leave

any time he or she wants.

Confidentiality and anonymity. The participants were given the right to choose to

include or not to include hi/her name in the forms that he/she answered.the participant

request his or her name to not be made known, the researchers had concealed the identity of

the participants who wished to be anonymous. The same goes for some information that

they wish to not be made known.

Incentives. Participants who fit the requirements and completed the survey were

entered in a raffle for Php 500 gift vouchers. Five winners were selected through an online

randomizers.
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 28
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Chapter 3
Results
In this chapter, the sample’s demographic information and statistical analyses of all

data gathered is presented in response to each research question. For the first and second

questions, the extent to which Filipino millennials experience psychological

meaningfulness (PM) and work engagement (WE) were tackled. The third question

addressed the hypothesized relationship between PM and WE. Subsequent analyses of the

data in terms of age group and job categories were also discussed, as some significant

differences were also determined.

Demographic Information

A total of 474 respondents were able to answer the scales; however, some had

missing responses or did not meet the requirements for participation, leaving only 462

responses valid for data analyses. As shown in Table 1 there were more female

respondents compared to male respondents. All respondents were of the ages 20 to 36

years old (M = 25.190 years, SD = 3.929); however, majority (77.49%) of the respondents

were young millennials aged 20 to 27 years (M = 23.397 years, SD = 1.962) as opposed to

22.51% who were old millennials aged 28 to 36 years old (M = 31.365, SD = 2.462).

Technicians and associate professionals (N = 139) and clerical workers (N = 113) made up

more than half of the sample populations’ job categories; managers and professionals

followed after with roughly 18% stake each, and least covered were service and sales

workers and those self-employed. A further look at the jobs the surveyed millennials
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 29
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

engaged in revealed that majority or 88.41% of young millennials were employed as

technicians and associate professionals (N = 122), while the most common job for the

older millennials at 36.54% was as a manager (N = 38).

Table 1.

Frequency Distribution of the Sample Population

Variables Frequency Percentage

Sex Males 116 25.11%

Females 346 74.89%

Age Groups Older Millennials 104 22.51%

Younger Millennials 358 77.49%

Job Categories Clerical Workers 113 24.46%

Managers 85 18.40%

Professionals 84 18.18%

Self-Employed 2 0.43%

Services and Sales Workers 39 8.44%

Technicians and Associate Professionals 139 30.09%


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 30
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Main Findings

Psychological Meaningfulness. As can be seen in Table 2, the overall mean score

for Psychological Meaningfulness (PM) is 5.36 (SD=0.869); with the highest possible

score of 7, indicating that respondents agree that their jobs have meaning. A further look at

the means across the indicators of PM show that contribution (C) was the highest amongst

the three (Mean=5.72, SD=1.089). Recognition (R) had the lowest mean score

(Mean=4.82, SD=1.086), which indicates that participants somewhat agreed that they were

given ample recognition for the work that they do.

Table 2.

Descriptive Statistics for Psychological Meaningfulness

Variables Mean Standard Deviation

Psychological Meaningfulness
5.357 0.870
Recognition
4.815 1.087
Challenge
5.450 1.270
Contribution
5.716 1.090
Note: N = 462

Work Engagement. Based on the norms established for the UWES-17 (Schaufeli,

2004), WE is shown in Table 3 to be average in its overall score (M = 4.241, SD = 0.967)

and across its subscales of Vigor (V; M = 4.17, SD = 1.036), Dedication (D; Mean = 4.53,
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 31
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

SD = 1.103), and Absorption (A; Mean = 4.07, SD = 1.007). D was the highest amongst the

three indicators.

Table 3.

Descriptive statistics for work Enagement

Variables Mean Standard Deviation

Work Engagement 4.241 0.968

Vigor 4.169 1.037

Dedication 4.532 1.104

Absorption 4.071 1.008

Note: N = 462

Table 4.

Correlation between psychological meaningfulness and work engagement

R
Variable t p Beta df R
Square

Intercept -0.252 0.801 -0.837 460 0.5179 0.72


Psychological
22.228 .001* 1.513 460
Meaningfulness

Psychological meaningfulness and work engagement. The third research

question sought to understand the relationship between PM and WE. The Pearson’s

correlation test revealed that PM and WE have a strong and positive relationship (R =
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 32
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

0.720, p = 0.001 < 0.01). Results of a subsequent linear regression analysis showed that

Psychological Meaningfulness is indeed a significant predictor of Work Engagement (sig.

0.001 < 0.05, df= 460, t stat = 22.228). It was also noted that 51.79% of the variances were

explained by this model (R = 51.79%) and that for every 0.802 increase in Psychological
2

Meaningfulness, a 1.0 increase in Work Engagement can be expected.


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 33
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Chapter 4

Discussion

This study was conducted with the aim of better understanding Filipino millennials’

experience of psychological meaningfulness and work engagement as well as the

relationship of the two constructs mentioned. The results showed that Filipino millennials

experienced average levels of both psychological meaningfulness and work engagement,

and that psychological meaningfulness predicted work engagement. These, along with

additional findings, will be discussed as follows.

Psychological meaningfulness for millennials. Results showed that overall, Filipino

millennials somewhat agree that their work is meaningful. That is, they receive recognition

from their coworkers and superiors, view it as having challenge, and feel that their

contributions matter. It is possible that the millennials surveyed only somewhat agree

because while they believe their contributions are significant in the organization’s progress

and growth, they do not receive as much recognition for these contributions from people at

work. This inequality may have affected their experience of psychological meaningfulness

because as said by Kahn (1990), the experience of psychological meaningfulness is to feel

that one is receiving a return on investments of one’s self in a currency of physical,

cognitive, or emotional energy; hence, recognition is perceived as a reward for the

contributions that were put forth. Their results came out as average because they don’t

receive much recognition, therefore, they didn’t experience much meaningfulness. The

reason for this may be because of hindrances to meaningfulness which are being taken for
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 34
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

granted (most experienced), unfairness, feeling of isolation, and better judgment overridden

- opinions and experiences were disregarded. In other words, anything that tampers

recognition of their competence and perceived impact, interpersonal connectedness, and

self-concordance (Lee, 2017). In addition, providing successful feedback relied on the

leader's ability to convey respect, sensitivity, relevance, specific explanations, and visual

examples since millennials value recognition because they perceive as a help for them to fit

in and advance in their organization (Cerf, 2017)

Work engagement for millennials. Findings also showed that the surveyed Filipino

millennials experience average levels of work engagement. This means that they often

experience vigor, absorption, and dedication while working. In line with the findings

above, surveyed Filipino Millennials only experience an average level of work engagement

because they only somewhat agree that they find meaning with their work, to support this,

previous study suggest that employees who found meaning in their work tend to perform

better and are more engaged in their work (Aktouf, 1992; May, Gilson & Harter, 2004). A

study found that levels of work engagement tended to be lower in Eastern countries which

may be because they are more collectivistic (Hu et. al, 2014). This may explain why the

work engagement was average. Additionally, age is a factor affecting the work engagement

of millennials. The older the employee, the more engaged they are. Older employees tend

to be more engaged than young employees. This finding is consistent with the main

findings in the UWES scale (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004).


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 35
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Older millennials experience more psychological meaningfulness and work

engagement than younger millennials. While millennials have many similarities within

their generation, the theorized split between older and younger millennials is evidenced in

some differing factors. As noted early on, there are two major differences: older millennials

were more realistic and financially-conscious, and they seek meaning in their work as well

as work-life balance On the other hand, younger millennials were more practical, sought

out steady work and overtime (BridgeWorks, 2017; Hammer, 2015; Mang & Piper, 2012;

Singal, 2017). However, it is possible that this is not just a generational difference but also

a matter of one’s circumstances and difference in developmental stage such as emerging

adulthood.

Emerging adulthood (roughly 18-25 years old) is a concept coined to explain a

phase between adolescence and adulthood in which the individual is in a period of self-

exploration prior to transitioning into adulthood (Arnett, 2010). It was said to be a ―self-

focused age‖ wherein people in this phase explore possibilities and find out who they really

are and what they want to be, hence, this is period of instability for individuals in this phase

(Arnett, 2010). There are five distinguishing factors of emerging adulthood namely: (1) age

of identity exploration, (2) age of instability, (3) most self-focused age of life, (4) age of

feeling in-between or in-transition, and (5) age of possibilities (Arnett, 2015; Benzon et al.,

2017).
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 36
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

In this study, 82.96% or 297 out of 358 young millennials are in the emerging

adulthood stage (aged 18 to 25 years old), which could explain why they have significantly

lower scores than older millennials. They are more unstable with regards to their work and

have the tendency to go ―job hopping‖, or move from one job to another at short time

intervals. Emerging adulthood is a period of time wherein people in this phase are still

trying to develop their skills which accordingly leads to them being on a constant search for

self-improvement and personal growth. Once they feel that they are no longer learning

anything from their work, they quit their jobs and find a new and more challenging work to

further improve themselves. Emerging adulthood is also the age of instability; hence it can

be said that younger millennials still do not know what they want. This explains why they

do not experience meaningfulness as much as older millennials do. Since what they are

doing is not, for certain, what they wish to pursue, they do not find meaning in the work

that they are in, thus, having low work engagement.

In addition, younger millennial is the age group that has just started out or entered

the workforce, hence they have a realistic view with regards to work. As aforementioned,

psychological meaningfulness manifests from the meaning of work and the psychological

meaning of one’s job (van Zyl, Deacon & Rothman, 2010). The meaning of work is simply

the general level of significance of one's work to his or her life, which has three distinct

dimensions: viewing work as a job, work as a career, or work as a calling. Since younger

millennials are just starting out, it can be said that they view their work as a job rather than
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 37
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

a career or a calling, which entails that there more are concerned with the monetary

rewards they get from their work. Because of economic realities, they have realistic

expectations with regards to salary and their first job. They understand that their first job

would not be able to fulfill or satisfy their wants and needs, specifically psychological

meaningfulness (Ng, Schweitzer & Lyons, 2010).

Older millennials, on the other hand, are already past the emerging adulthood stage

with the age range of 28 to 36 years old. Hence, it could be said that they are more stable

compared to younger millennials. They have gained more experience with working since

they have been in the workforce longer than younger millennials have. Another possible

explanation for this is that older millennials may be experiencing work-role fit better than

younger millennials do. Work-role fit is the perceived fit between a person’s self-concept

and work-roles (Rothmann & Hamukang’Andu, 2013). It is when a person’s work role is

aligned with the individual’s values and beliefs that they experience work-role fit. Van Zyl,

1Deacon, and Rothmann (2010) found that work-role fit predicts psychological

meaningfulness. The multiple regression analysis results revealed that 79% of the variance

in psychological meaningfulness was predicted by work-role fit. This means that if an

individual’s work enables them to express themselves fully, the experience of

psychological meaningfulness follows. The same can be said about older millennials. Older

millennials are accustomed to the notion that studying hard would land them a job. This

could mean that they value hard work and perseverance. With a stable goal of simply
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 38
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

getting a job, older millennials are able to express their values and beliefs fully, thus

ensuing the experience of work-role fit. Younger millennials, on the other hand, having a

hard time facing the worst job market, thus, they are accustomed to be more idealistic in

finding jobs that suits them well and that they will be happy about (Smith & Aaker, 2013).

High levels of work-role fit leads to the experience of psychological meaningfulness

leading to work engagement.

Psychological meaningfulness and work engagement are strongly correlated. The

results of this study showed that psychological meaningfulness and work engagement have

a positive, direct, and strong relationship. This is aligned with the results of previous

studies, such as those presented in Chapter 2. Several studies have linked psychological

meaningfulness and work engagement together since Kahn (1990) first identified it along

with safety and availability as a potential antecedents of work engagement; it was later

found to be the strongest predictor of work engagement in comparison to psychological

safety and psychological availability (May et. al, 2004) Other studies have found

psychological meaningfulness to mediate work engagement's relationship with positive

organizational commitment (Geldenhuys et. al, 2014) or work-role fit (Olivier &

Rothmann, 2007).

Psychological meaningfulness as a predictor of work engagement implies that an

individual will be more engaged or involved in his work if he experiences psychological

meaningfulness. Millennials want meaning, they want to have a sense of purpose in what
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 39
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

they are doing. Millennials are motivated to work by the thought of being able to make a

difference, by being given the chance to improve themselves (Cecilia, 2016). If they see

that their contributions help in the growth of the organization, if they feel that their efforts

are recognized and valued, and if they are given tasks that require them to utilize their

skills, they will feel a sense of meaningfulness in their work, thus, perceiving themselves as

a valuable member of the organization. With this, the employees will exhibit

organizationally fit behaviors and execute better performance.


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 40
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Chapter 5

Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations

Summary

This study investigated on the experience of psychological meaningfulness and

work engagement of Filipino millennials in the workplace. The millennial generation

consists of those people who were born within the age range of 1981 to 1987, and is

divided into two age groups namely the older millennials and the younger millennials.

Psychological meaningfulness is the general significance of work to a person’s life (Kahn,

1990). It is simply the value of an individual’s work to his or her life. It was said that

psychological meaningfulness ensues work engagement. Work engagement is simply a

―positive, fulfilling, affective-motivational state of work-related well-being‖ comprised of

three components: vigor, dedication, and absorption (Salanova, González-Romá, & Bakker,

2002). There have been studies made that showed psychological meaningfulness is an

antecedent of work engagement. This study intended to examine the connection and the

relationship of psychological meaningfulness and work engagement with regards to

millennials with the following research questions:

1. To what extent do millennials experience psychological meaningfulness?

2. To what extent do millennials experience work engagement?


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 41
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

3. What is the relationship between psychological meaningfulness and work

engagement?

The millennials were divided into two age groups: (a) Younger Millennials, who were born

in the period of 1990-1997, and (b) Older Millennials who were born in the period of 1981-

1989 (Pew Research Center, 2015). The Psychological Meaningfulness in this study was

measured by three indicators; (1) Perceived Meaningfulness of Contribution (2) Challenge,

and (3) Recognition (Brown and Leigh, 1996). While Work Engagement was be measured

using the three indicators; (1) Vigor, (2) Absorption, and (3) Dedication (Salanova et al,

2002). There have were not much research about these variables in the Philippines as most

of the studies found were Western literature, hence, the researchers wanted to conduct this

study on the relationship of psychological meaningfulness and work engagement.

The researchers used a two scales along with a demographics questionnaire as

instruments for the study. The two scales were the Psychological Meaningfulness subscale

taken from the Psychological Climate Scale and the Utretcht Work Engagement Scale

(UWES), in which both these scales are 7-point likert scales. Survey forms were

disseminated in both online and printed forms. The study made use of various statistical

analyses such as correlation and linear regression in order to analyze the data gathered. The

tests revealed there is indeed a relationship between the two variables; it was seen that

psychological meaningfulness predicts work engagement.


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 42
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Conclusions

Overall, the Millennial generation in general, craves for meaning in their

workplace- when we say meaningful work it means that the employee can contribute

significant output and input at work, he/she is also recognized by the organization and co-

workers, and he/she should be challenged by the tasks wherein he/she can use her skills and

talents and other resources. This sense of meaning will lead to a more vigorous, dedicated,

and absorbed employee. In short, finding meaning in one’s work and job will lead to work

engagement for Filipino Millennials.

The researchers also found out that Psychological Meaningfulness and Work

Engagement is a process wherein the longer you are working the higher both will be like

how the results show that the older millennials are more inclined than the younger

millennials. Since older millennials have already explored their possibilities of what they

want to be after years of working. They are also more stable because they have already

experienced work role fit which means a person's work role is aligned with individual's

values and beliefs (Rothmann & Hamukang' Andu, 2013). While the younger millennials

just started going in the workforce so they have a realistic view when it comes to work

because of the economic realities. Hence, they have realistic expectations with regards to

their salary and first job. They also understand that their first job would not be able to

fulfill or satisfy their want and needs (Ng, Schweitzer & Lyons, 2010). They are also

unstable since just starting to explore their possibilities and find out who they are and what
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 43
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

they want so their psychological meaningfulness might be lower than older millennials so

they also job hop in order to enhance their skills for self improvement and personal growth.

Hence, to achieve psychological meaningfulness, employers or human resources

should give them challenging tasks or works to work on so they will have experience, will

be able to learn, and will be able to use their skills and what they learn. They can also given

opportunities to work on tasks that will have a significant impact on the organization. Then

be recognized for their hard work, contribution and their ability. For example, giving them

promotion or giving recognition through "employee of the month" which will make them

more engaged with work. Engagement in work can be seen through the increase in their

vigor - energy -, dedication - sense of involvement-, and absorption - full concentration and

enjoyable engrossment. Employers can also make the workplace an environment for

encouragements and fun - once in awhile - to lighten up their mood and motivate them.

Lastly, know yourself, find a job that interests you while also having your skills in line with

the job and what you have learned to become competent.

Recommendations

Although this study were able to find significant results and proved the hypothesis

was right. The researchers, still admit that there are some factors that still needs to be

improved for the next studies about the Psychological Meaningfulness and Work
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 44
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Engagement of FIlipino Millennials. Here are the recommendations that the researchers

prepared for the future researchers of this topic.

Methodological Considerations

A more established scale. Studies have shown that psychological meaningfulness

predicts work engagement despite the methodological limitations of the study. Hence,

researchers recommend to look for more established psychological meaningfulness scale

since the psychological subscale taken from the Psychological Climate Scale by Brown

leigh (2004) had no specific instructions as to how the scoring should be.

Standardizing the tests. to control the extraneous variables such as using solely pen

and paper or solely online instead of dual format of data gathering.

Balanced samples. Lastly, balancing out the sample size of the female and male,

the young and old, and the job categories are needed to further determine which kind of the

jobs does the millennial find meaningful and engaging which is helpful for industries to

further improve job performance and lessen the risk of burnout (Rich, Lepine & Crawford,

2010; Bakker & Oerlemans 2016).

Future Research

Consider other variables. There might be more variables to consider that can

predict work engagement and variables to mediate psychological meaningfulness to work

engagement for Filipino Millennials.


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 45
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Cohort comparison. In order to identity more millennials characteristics at

workplace, the researchers think that including other cohort (EG. Generation X, Baby

boomers, etc.) to the study population will be helpful in identifying distinct traits of

millennials.

Local studies. The researchers recommend further research or studies on work

engagement and psychological meaningfulness and millennials in the Filipino context

because this study was based in foregone studies due to the lack of local studies in the said

variables.

Qualitative study. Since this study was purely quantitative, the researchers think it

would be best to also do a qualitative study, to know what is Psychological Meaningfulness

and Work Engagement for Filipino Millennials and also to establish more the real

relationship between Psychological Meaningfulness and Work Engagement for Filipino

Millennials. This is also to test the findings of this research if Psychological

Meaningfulness is indeed a predictor of Work Engagement.

Practical Uses
Career counselling. This study can be a help for guidance counsellor to include

Psychological Meaningfulness to their talks and sessions, to advice to their clients and to

encourage them to find a Work where they think they can contribute, recognized, and

challenge. This can help the future Millennials workers to decide on what path or work

they should take wherein they will experience a sense of meaning and purpose.
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 46
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Human resource practitioners. This study will benefit a lot in understanding how it

is to deal with millennials in the workplace specifically knowing what makes them engaged

and find meaning in what they are doing which can be done through a qualitative research.

This can also help them to develop a program in their organization wherein they can help

their employees gain more meaning at work and be more engaged at work.

Developmental psychologists. They can further research about the millennials to

know more about the different characteristics evident between young millennials and old

millennials since there are not enough studies about the distinction between characteristics

of these two age groups.


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 47
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

References
Akhtar R., Boustani L., Tsuvivrikos D., Chamorro-Pzeumic T., (2014) The
Engageable personality; Personality and trait EI as predictors of work engagement.
Retrieved from: from: http://doi.org/10/10.1017/j.paid.2014.08.40
Adkins, A. (2016). U.S. Employee Engagement Reaches New High in March. Gallup
Retrieved from http://news.gallup.com/poll/190622/employee-engagement
-reaches-new-high-march.aspx%20pic%20in%20fb
Attridge, M. (2009). Measuring and Managing Employee Work Engagement: A Review of
the Research and Business Literature. Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health,
24(4), 383-398. doi:10.1080/15555240903188398
Adkins, A. (2016). U.S. Employee Engagement Reaches New High in March. Gallup.
Retrieved from http://news.gallup.com/poll/190622/employee-engagement
-reaches-new-high-march.aspx%20pic%20in%20fb
Attridge, M. (2009). Measuring and Managing Employee Work Engagement: A Review of
the Research and Business Literature. Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health,
24(4), 383-398. doi:10.1080/15555240903188398
Austin, S. F., Crocker, M., & Meier, J. (2010). Generation Y in the Workforce: Managerial
Challenges. The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning,6(1).
Bakker, A. B., Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., & Taris, T. W. (2008). Work engagement:
emerging concept in occupational health psychology. Work & Stress, 22(3),
187-200.
Bakker, A., & Schaufeli, W., (2004, December). UWES: Utrecht Work Engagement Scale
(Preliminary Manual) [PDF].

Bakker, A., Demerouti, E.(2007). The job demands-resource model; Sate of the art.
Journal of managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309-238.

Bakker, A. B. (2011). An Evidence-Based Model of Work Engagement.


Institute of Psychology, Department of Work and Organizational Psychology,
Woudestein, P. 12-47.
BridgeWorks. (2017). Millennial 101. Retrieved from
http://www.generations.com/2017/01/27/millennial-101/
Bursch, D., & Kelly, K. (2014). Managing the multigenerational workplace. University of
North Carolina Executive Department.
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 48
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Bano, S., Vyas, K., & Gupta, R. (2015). Perceived organisational support and work
engagement: A cross generational study. Journal of Psychosocial Research, 10(2),
357-364.
Cecilia, E. O. (2016, June 04). Getting the best out of the Millennials. Retrieved July 14,
from: http://business.inquirer.net/210831/getting-the-best-out-of-the-millennials
De Neve, J. E., & Ward, G. W. (2017). Happiness at work. Said Business School.
Debevec, K., Schewe, C. D., Madden, T. J., & Diamond, W. D. (2013). Are todays
Millennials splintering into a new generational cohort? Maybe! Journal of
Consumer Behaviour, 12(1), 20-31. doi:10.1002/cb.1400
De la Cruz, G. (2016). What you need to know about millennials in the PH workforce.
Rappler. Retrieved from https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/147883-
what-you-need-know-about-filipino-millennials-workforce
Dubé, D. (2017). Millennials in the workplace: Why they’re not entirely to blame for
everything. Global News. Retrieved from
https://globalnews.ca/news/3349180/millennials-in-the-workplace-
why-theyre-not-entirely-to-blame-for-everything/
Dimayuga, P. J. (2016). Filipino Millennial Employee Decoded [Infographic]. Retrieved
from https://manilarecruitment.com/manila-recruitment-articles-advice/filipino-
millennial-employees-decoded-infographic/
Dumlao-Abadilla, D. (2016, January 29). 40% of Pinoy millennials may quit jobs in 2
years. Retrieved July 14, 2017, from http://business.inquirer.net/206328/40-of-pinoy-
millennials-may-quit-jobs-in-2-years#ixzz4AcFTQmzH
Ernst and Young. (2015). Global Generations: A Global Study on Work-Life Challenges
Across Generations. Retrieved from http://www.ey.com/us/en/about-us/our-people-
and-culture/ey-work-life-challenges-across-generations-global-study
Freelancing. (2016). [Infographics] 2016 Annual Freelancer Report. Retrieved from
http://www.freelancing.ph/infographics-2016-freelancer-annual-report/
Fromm, J. (2016, March 15). Millennials In The Workplace: They Don't Need Trophies
But They Want Reinforcement. Retrieved July 14, 2017, from
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jefffromm/2015/11/06/millennials-in-the-workplace-
they-dont-need-trophies-but-they-want-reinforcement/#fef4d3753f69
Guzman, A. B., Largo, E., Mandap, L., & Muñoz, V. M. (2014). The Mediating Effect of
Happiness on the Job Satisfaction of Aging Filipino Workers: A Structural Equation
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 49
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Model (SEM). Educational Gerontology,40(10), 767-782.


doi:10.1080/03601277.2014.882108.
Gutib, J., San Juan, E., Soriaga, J., Vergara L. (2016) Work Engagement and Psychological
Flexibility as Predictors of Filipino Mental Health Professionals’ Compassion
Fatigue, Compassion Satisfaction, and Burnout. Retrieved from: DLSU Libraries
Thesis Col. UG, 12F, 9-22.

Huyler, D., Pierre, Y., Ding, W., & Norelus, A. (n.d.). Millennials in the Workplace:
Positioning Companies for Future Success

Halbesleben , J., Harvey J., Bolino, M., (2009) Too engaged? A conversion of sources view
of the relationship between work engagement and work interference with family.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1452-1465.
Hammer.E.E (2015). Shifts in Calling: An Emphasis on Calling for Millennials. American
Journal of Management, 15 (4), 22-25. Retrieved from
http://m.www.na-businesspress.com/AJM/HammerEE_Web15_4_.pdf
Howe, Neil; Strauss, William (1991). Generations: The History of America's Future, 1584
2069. New York: William Morrow & Company. ISBN 978-0-688-11912-6.
Ilagan, J., Hechanova, M., Co, T., Pleyto., V. (2014) ―Bakit Ka Kumakayod?‖ Developing
a Filipino Needs Theory of Motivationl. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 2014
(1), 117-143.
Jacobs, H. (2013). An Examination of Psychological Meaningfulness, Safety, and
Availability as the Underlying Mechanisms linking Job Features and Personal
Characteristics to Work Engagement. FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations.
Retrieved July, 2017.
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagement And
Disengagement At Work. Academy of Management Journal,33(4), 692-724.
doi:10.2307/256287
Kaifi, B. A., Nafei, W. A., Khanfar, N. M., & Kaifi, M. M. (2010). A Multi-Generational
Workforce: Managing and Understanding Millennials. International Journal of
Business and Management,7(24). doi: 10.5539/ijbm.v7n24p88
Laureta, I. (2016). Where are millennials at?!. Manila Bulletin. Retrieved from
http://newsbits.mb.com.ph/2016/12/04/where-the-millennials-at/
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 50
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Mäkikangas, A., Schaufeli, W., Tolvanen, A., & Feldt, T. (2013). Engaged managers are
not workaholics: Evidence from a longitudinal person centered analysis. Revista De
Psicología Del Trabajo y De Las Organizaciones, 29(3), 135.
Hammer.E.E (2015). Shifts in Calling: An Emphasis on Calling for Millennials. American
Journal of Management, 15 (4), 22-25. Retrieved from
http://m.www.na-businesspress.com/AJM/HammerEE_Web15_4_.pdf
Hu, Q., Schaufeli, W., Taris, T. W., Hessen, D. J., Hakanen, J., Salanova, M., & Shimazu,
A. (2014). " East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet" Work
engagement and workaholism across Eastern and Western cultures. Procedia: Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 6-24.
Management Strategies. (2017). The Future Is Now: Trends In Human Resources.
Retrieved from http://www.mgtstrat-asia.com/blog/the-future-is-now-trends-in-
human-resources/
Mamuyac, R. H. (2016, April 17). What do Millennials look for in a job? Retrieved July
14, 2017, fromhttp:// business.inquirer.net/209541/
what-do-millennials-look-for-in-a-job#ixzz4AcFvd3mH
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 Organizational Psychology,77(1), 11-37.
doi:10.1348/096317904322915892
Moore, K. (2014, October 03). Millennials Work For Purpose, Not Paycheck. Retrieved
July 14, 2017, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/karlmoore/2014/10/02
/millennials-work-for-purpose-not-paycheck/#37229f126a51
Morgeson, F. P., & Humphrey, S. E. (2006). The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ):
developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and
the nature of work. Journal of applied psychology, 91(6), 1321.
Ng, E.S.W., Schweitzer, L. & Lyons, S.T. (2010). New Generation, Great Expectations: A
Field Study of the Millennial Generation. Journal of Business and
Psychology,25(2), 281. doi:10.1007/s10869-010-9159-4
Ozcelik, G. (2015). Engagement and Retention of the Millennial Generation in the
Workplace through Internal Branding. International Journal of Business and
Management,10(3). doi:10.5539/ijbm.v10n3p99.
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 51
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Park, J., & Gursoy, D. (2011). Generation effect on the relationship between work
engagement, satisfaction, and turnover intention among US hotel employees.
Washington State University.
Pew Research Center. (2015). Most Millennials Resist the 'Millennial' Label. Retrieved
from http://www.people-press.org/2015/09/03/most-millennials-resist-the-
millennial-label/
Rothmann, S., & Hamukang'andu, L. (2013). Callings, work role fit, psychological
meaningfulness and work engagement among teachers in Zambia. South African
Journal of Education, 33(2), 1-16.
Sahadi, J. (2015). Where do millennials want to work? Not at corporations. CNN.
Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/2015/05/12/pf/millennials-
work/index.html?iid=HP_River

Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of


managerial psychology, 21(7), 600-619.
Schaufeli, W., Bakker, A. (2004) Jobs demands, Job resources, and their relationship
with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Retrieved from: Journal
of Organizational Behavior 25, 293-315 (2004).
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2003). UWES–Utrecht work engagement scale: test
manual.Unpublished Manuscript: Department of Psychology, Utrecht University.
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). Defining and measuring work engagement:
Bringing clarity to the concept. Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory
and research, 10-24.
Schaufeli, W., Salanova, M., Gonzales Roma, V., Bakker A., (2002) The Measurement
of Engamanet and Burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach.
Retrieved from: Journal of Happiness 3: Pp. 71-92, 2002.
Singal, J. (2017). Are you an Old Millennial or a Young Millennial?. CNN. Retrieved from
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/01/health/young-old-millennial-partner/index.html
Sonnentag S. (2003) Recovery, Work Engagement, and Proactive Behavior: A New
look Between Nonwork and Work. Retrieved from: First publ. in: Journal of
Applied Psychology 88 (2003), 3, pp. 518-528
Steger, M. F., Dik, B. J., & Duffy, R. D. (2012). Measuring meaningful work: The work and
meaning inventory (WAMI). Journal of Career Assessment, 20(3), 322-337.
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 52
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Tolbize, A. (2008). Generational differences in the workplace. Retrieved from


http://rtc.umn.edu/docs/2_18_Gen_diff_workplace.pdf
Twenge, J. M., & Campbell, S. M. (2008). Generational differences in psychological traits
and their impact on the workplace. Journal of Managerial Psychology,23(8), 862-
877. doi:10.1108/02683940810904367
Van Zyl, L. E., Deacon, E., & Rothmann, S. (2010). Towards happiness: Experiences of
work-role fit, meaningfulness and work engagement of industrial/organisational

psychologists in South Africa. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 36(1), 1-10.


Veal, AJ (2004) Definitions of Leisure and Recreation. Retrieved from; Australian
Journal of Leisure and Recreation, Vol. 2, No. 4, 1992, pp. 44-48, 52.
World Health Organization (1995). Global strategy on occupational health for all: the way
to health at work. Report prepared for the Second Meeting of the WHO
Collaborating Centres in Occupational Health held October 11-14, 2014 in Beijing,
China.
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 53
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

APPENDIX A
INVITATION. INFORMED CONSENT, AND DEMOGRAPHICS
A. INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE:
Dear Ma’am/Sir,
Hello we are AB Psychology students of De La Salle University and currently doing our
thesis. This research study is about the Psychological Meaningfulness and Work
Engagement among Filipino Millennials.
To be able to answer this survey you should be a Filipino Millennial who is currently
working in the Philippines. This form would at least take 6 minutes of your time, and
should you choose to participate in this study, please read the following terms and
conditions for your guidance.
Your rights as a participant:
1. All of your responses will be saved in an excel sheet that can only be accessed by the
researchers and their mentor. Your responses will not be published or used in any public
research accounts or studies. All the data and information provided here are will be kept
confidential.
2.   The researchers and their mentor have no intentions of tracing your identity to further
emphasize and establish the nature of anonymity.
3.   If you feel any kind of discomfort and do not want to proceed with the study, you are
free to stop and leave if you wish to during the testing and the researchers cannot stop you
from doing so.
4.    If you wish to see the results of this study, you are entitled to have a feedback from the
researchers, you can contact the researchers through email or sms. Should you have
concerns or questions, feel free to contact us through any of contact details provided below.

Sincerely,
__________________________ ______________________
Stephanie Estelle Bernardo Kathrine Angela Lim
09164518833 09167870495
[email protected] [email protected]
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 54
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

______________________ ______________________
Mark Kristian Blando Lizette Lim
09260527782 09778568154
[email protected] [email protected]

B. CONSENT FORM
I have read the foregoing information of the invitation and have had the opportunity
to ask questions about the study, which were answered by the researchers to my
satisfaction.
I volunteer to participate in this research knowing also that I can withdraw at any
time without providing a reason nor will I be questioned for my withdrawal.
My name and any other information that could be used to identify me will remain
anonymous. The researchers will keep all data confidential for your protection, and only
the researchers will have access to your personal information.
Procedures on confidentiality have been clearly explained to me, and I understand
that this is for academic purposes only. My responses are not to be published or used in any
reports, publications and other research outputs.

____________________________________
Signature of Participant/Date

C. DEMOGRAPHICS

Gender:
( ) Male
( ) Female
( ) Others; ________
Birth date: ________
Position: ______________________________________________
Contact #: ____________
Email: ____________________
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 55
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

APPENDIX B
STUDY SCALES
A. Psychological Meaningfulness subscale taken from Psychological Climate Scale
Please read each item carefully and consider how well it describes your current
organizational environment. Kindly select the number corresponding to how you strongly
feel, with 1 as ―Strongly Disagree‖ to 7 as ―Strongly Agree‖.
NEITHER
STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE AGREE STRONGLY
RECOGNITION DISAGREE
DISAGREE
SOMEWHAT NOR
AGREE
SOMEWHAT AGREE
DISAGREE

1. I rarely feel my
work is taken for 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
granted.
2. My superiors
generally
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
appreciate the way
I do my job.
3. The
organization
recognizes the
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
significance of the
contributions I
make.
NEITHER
STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE AGREE STRONGLY
CHALLENGE DISAGREE
DISAGREE
SOMEWHAT NOR
AGREE
SOMEWHAT AGREE
DISAGREE

1.My job is very


1 2 3 4 5 6 7
challenging.
2. It takes all my
resources to
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
achieve my work
objectives.
NEITHER
STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE SOMEWHAT STRONGLY
CONTRIBUTION DISAGREE
DISAGREE
SOMEWHAT NOR AGREE
AGREE
AGREE
DISAGREE

1. I feel very
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
useful in my job.
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 56
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

2. Doing my job
well really makes a 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
difference.
3. I feel like a key
member of the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
organization.
4. The work I do is
very valuable to 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
the organization.

B . Utretch Work Engagement Scale

The following 17 statements are about how you feel at work. Please read each statement
carefully and decide if you ever feel this way about your job. Kindly encircle the number
corresponding to how often you felt this way, with 0 as ―Never‖ and 6 as ―Always‖.
Almost Some Very
Never Rarely Often Always
Never times Often

1. At my work, I feel bursting with


0 1 2 3 4 5 6
energy* (VI1)
2.I find the work that I do full of
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
meaning and purpose (DE1)
3. Time flies when I'm working
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
(AB1)
4. At my job, I feel strong and
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
vigorous (VI2)*
5. I am enthusiastic about my job
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
(DE2)*
6. When I am working, I forget
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
everything else around me (AB2)
7. My job inspires me (DE3)* 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

8. When I get up in the morning, I


0 1 2 3 4 5 6
feel like going to work (VI3)*
9. I feel happy when I am working
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
intensely (AB3)*
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 57
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

10. I am proud on the work that I


0 1 2 3 4 5 6
do (DE4)*
11. I am immersed in my work
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
(AB4)*
12. I can continue working for very
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
long periods at a time (VI4)
13. To me, my job is challenging
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
(DE5)
14. I get carried away when I’m
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
working (AB5)*
15. At my job, I am very resilient,
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
mentally (VI5)
16. It is difficult to detach myself
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
from my job (AB6)
17. At my work I always
persevere, even when things do 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
not go well (VI6)
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 58
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Appendix C
Other Findings

Psychological Meaningfulness Indicators and Work Engagement Indicators. A

further look at the relationships of PM and WE’s indicators was warranted due to the

significant correlations betweeen their indicators which can be seen in Table 4. The

correlations between WE's indicators are understandably high, while for PM's indicators,

Challenge (Ch) and Recognition (R) seem to have the lowest across all indicator

relationships. The strongest correlations between PM and WE indicators were of

Contribution (Co) and Vigor (V; r = 0.652), Dedication (D; r = 0.644), and Absorption (A;

r = 0.539)

Table 4

Correlation between Indicators of Psychological Meaningfulness and Indicators of Work

Engagement

V D A R Ch Co

Vigor (V) -

Dedication (D) .831** -

Absorption (A) .764** .758** -

Recognition (R) .486** .444** .438** -

Challenge (Ch) .362** .507** .391** .180** -

Contribution (Co) .652** .644** .539** .508** .350** -

Note: ** correlation is significant at p<.05 (one-tailed)


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 59
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Subsequent multiple regression analyses were conducted in order to understand the

strength and direction of these relationships.; In Table 5, one can see that all indicators of

PM predict the indicators of WE at varying levels. Co is again the highest predictor of V

(B= .492, df= 461, t= 11.964, sig.= 0.0001), D (B= .452, t= 11.492, df= 461, sig= .0001),

and A (B= .346, t= 7.673, df= 461, sig= .0001). D also appears to be the one most strongly

predicted by Co, Ch (B= .321, t= 9.324, df= 461, sig= .0001), and R (B= .157, t= 4.185,

df= 461, sig= .0001).

Table 5.
Multiple Regressional Analyses on Indicators of Psychological Meaningfulness for

Indicators of Work Engagement

Beta t Sig. Df p Rsquared

Vigor 461 0.513 0.478

Recognition 0.209 5.329 0.0001***

Challenge 0.152 4.22 0.0001***

Contribution 0.492 11.964 0.0001***

Dedication 461 0.097 0.523

Recognition 0.157 4.185 0.0001***

Challenge 0.321 9.324 0.0001***

Contribution 0.452 11.49 0.0001***


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 60
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Absorption 461 0.263 0.373

Recognition 0.221 5.141 0.001**

Challenge 0.23 5.819 0.001**

Contribution 0.346 7.673 0.001**

Note: **sig. at p < 0.01, ***sig. at p <0.001

Aside from the results answering the aforementioned research questions, initial analyses of

the data also showed that there may be differences in the PM and WE of Filipino

millennials in terms of age group as well as job categories. These are discussed as follows.

Older Millennials and Younger Millennials. The relationship of PM and WE

were also considered in terms of the older millennials (OM; aged 28 to 36 years old) and

younger millennials (YM; aged 20 to 27 years old); one-way ANOVA was then conducted

to see if the means were significantly different. Table 6 shows that OM appear to have

significantly higher means compared to YM across PM (p = 0.001), WE (p = 0.001), and

all of their respective indicators as they are significant at p > 0.01. However, R ( p = 0.019)

and Ch (p = 0.034) were significant only at p > 0.05.


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 61
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Table 6.

Mean, SD, and P-Values of Psychological Meaningfulness and Work Engagement For

Older and Younger Millennials

Variables Mean Standard Deviation Sig.

Older Younger Older Younger

Psychological
5.681 5.263 0.751 0.880 0.001**
Meaningfulness

Recognition 5.035 4.751 1.002 1.104 0.019*

Challenge 5.683 5.383 1.209 1.281 0.034*

Contribution 6.163 5.586 0.903 1.106 0.001**

4.564 4.147 0.877 0.974 0.001**


Work Engagement

Vigor 4.514 4.068 1.018 1.022 0.001**

Dedication 4.887 4.429 0.858 1.147 0.001**

Absorption 4.345 3.992 0.977 1.004 0.002**

Note: *sig. at p<0.05, **sig. at p<0.01; Old Millennials, N = 104; Young Millennials, N =

358

PM and WE for Older Millennials. A linear regression analysis was again

conducted to understand how much PM predicts WE for OM. Results show that this

relationship is still consistent in OM (p = 0.001 > 0.01, df = 103, t-stat = 9.25) although the
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 62
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

model explains 45.6% of the variance in WE (R2 = 0.456), as opposed to the overall

relationship of PM at WE explaining 51.8% of the variance.

PM and WE for Younger Millennials. Another linear regression analysis was

conducted for the YM, revealing a similar result (p = 0.001 < 0.01, df = 357, t-stat =

19.311), although this time the model explained 51.4% of the variances (R2 = 0.514). It

seems that the relationship between PM and WE may be stronger in YM than in OM.

Job Categories. Table 7 below summarizes the descriptive statistics of PM and WE

and their indicators across job categories; at a glance, the manager has the highest mean

scores for PM and its indicators, across all other job categories. Similarly, its scores for WE

and its indicators are amongst the highest, but the differences in the means are not as high.
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 63
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

Table 7.
Descriptive Statistics of Psychological Meaningfulness and Work Engagement across Jobs
Job Categories PM WE

R Ch Co Total V D A Total

Clerical Workers Mean 4.746 5.354 5.688 5.300 4.162 4.504 4.093 4.238

(N = 113) SD 1.096 1.307 1.028 0.814 0.919 1.090 0.967 0.900

Managers Mean 5.165 5.759 6.238 5.774 4.500 4.856 4.286 4.529

(N = 85) SD 0.970 1.216 0.822 0.737 0.986 0.980 0.899 0.868

Professionals Mean 4.813 5.327 5.682 5.313 4.093 4.483 3.988 4.171

(N = 84) SD 1.037 1.350 0.919 0.772 1.019 1.065 0.963 0.934

Self-Employed Mean 3.833 5.250 5.625 4.944 4.167 4.400 4.000 4.176

(N = 2) SD 1.179 0.354 1.237 0.864 1.414 1.414 0.943 1.248

Services and Sales


Mean 4.752 4.910 5.378 5.066 4.235 4.585 3.936 4.232
Workers

(N = 39) SD 0.874 1.404 1.333 0.891 1.036 1.116 1.174 1.017

Technicians and
Mean 4.698 5.572 5.540 5.267 3.990 4.365 4.002 4.105
Associate Professionals

(N = 138) SD 1.195 1.138 1.212 0.966 1.129 1.181 1.075 1.060

Total Mean 4.818 5.451 5.717 5.358 4.167 4.530 4.069 4.239

(N = 461) SD 1.087 1.271 1.091 0.870 1.037 1.105 1.008 0.968


Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 64
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

An overall significant difference was found in Psychological Meaningfulness across

job categories (mean = 5.38, F = 4.950, p = 0.0001), thus a Tukey HSD post-hoc analysis

was conducted (see Table 8). The only job category that was significantly higher in

Psychological Meaningfulness was of managers (mean = 5.774), in comparison to

professionals (mean = 5.313), clerical workers (mean = 5.300), technicians and associate

professionals (mean = 5.267), and services and sales workers (mean = 5.066). For WE

however, there was no significant difference seen for the different job categories (df = 461,

mean = 4.167, F-stat =3.343, p = 0.06 > 0.05).

Table 8.

Tukey HSD Post-Hoc Analysis of Psychological Meaningfulness across Job Categories

Variables Mean N m p c ta ss se

Manager (m) 5.774 85 - - - - - -


- -
Professional (p) 5.313 39 0.006** - - -
- -
Clerical (c) 5.300 83 0.002** 1.000 - -

Tech and Associate


(ta) 5.267 113 0.001** 0.999 1.000 - - -

Services and Sales


(ss) 5.066 138 0.001** 0.660 0.672 0782 - -

Self-Employed (se) 4.994 2 0.748 0.748 0.992 0.999 1.00 -


Note: ** sig. at p < 0.01
Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGFULNESS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT 65
OF FILIPINO MILLENIALS

PM & WE for Managers. Given that managers were the only job category that had

any significant difference from the others, a linear regressiona analysis was conducted to

determine the strength of PM and WE’s relationship for Managers. Findings were

consistent with other results; PM significantly predicted WE for millennial managers (sig.

0.001 < 0.01, df = 83, t-stat = 10.310), and 56.5% of variances were explained by this

model (R2 = 0.565).

View publication stats

You might also like