Introduction According to Beverly & Philip (2006), the concept of employee engagement is an essential aspect of human resource management practice. It is however vital to make clarifications concerning what the concept really entails. Various studies have been conducted to evaluate the concept of employee engagement in terms of its definition, how it can be measured and improved. The presentation aims at evaluating the concept of employee engagement in order to give a clarified meaning of what it entails for employees to be engaged. In addition the analysis will highlight some of the possible methods of Measuring and encouraging employee engagement.
Lastly the various Hr strategies that can be adopted by Putteridge Solutions plc in order have an engaged workforce even at the phase of financial difficulty. Beverly( 2006) outlines that the term employee engagement was initiated by the Gallup Organization resulting from a 25 year survey and interview on managers and employees. The intention of the study was to develop a measurable work environment that could be utilized for comparison. From the Gallup research, employee engagement is related to the profitability, productivity and employee retention.
The study indicated that happy employees are well equipped to handle the changes and stress that occur in the working environment. Companies should therefore focus on improving the wellbeing of the workforce in order to advance their productivity (Gallup Management Journal survey 2006). Different scholars have also evaluated the notion of employee engagement. Gerald and Dan (2008) give an evaluation of what employee engagement means through making reference to an engaged employee. The two scholars argue that an engaged employee is an individual who is enthusiastic and is involved fully in his or her occupation.
They further highlight that an engaged employee cares about the future of the company they work with and are definitely ready to invest their efforts in order for the organization to attain more success. As a result Gerald and Dan (2008) propose that managers have to initiate strategies and trends that can enhance the development of engaged employees. This is because today many practitioners use the wide spread notion that employee engagement involves creating an environment whereby employees can have cognitive vigilance and emotional attachment (Beverly & Philip 2006). Archie & Ann (2004) link the definition of employee engagement to the existing development of job involvement.
Peteraf (1993) notes that job development means the degree at which, the work context is fundamental to the person, and their identity. The two practitioners describe an employee who is fully engaged as one with attributes such as; Being emotionally and intellectually involved or bound to the organization An employee who can 100 percent in order to improve the organizations performance. One who goes beyond the basic responsibilities of the job in order to drive the organization forwardOne who has commitment to living by the values of the organizationDouglas & Richard (2004) define employee engagement using the level of involvement and commitment that an employee has towards the organization.
An employee who has characteristics of being engaged should be conscious of the context of the business and should work in harmony with other employees to improve the performance of the organization. Douglas & Richard (2004) also propose that the organization has to play a significant role nurturing and developing engagement, which is basically a two way relationship that transcends between the employer and the employee.
Employee engagement acts as a barometer that verifies the association that an individual has with the organization he/she works in (Peteraf 1993).