Performance appraisal fairness, work engagement, and intent to leave_ The study of employees in the private sector

UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS HO CHI MINH CITY
International School of Business
------------------------------

Do Thi Tuyet Nhung

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
FAIRNESS, WORK ENGAGEMENT,
AND INTENT TO LEAVE:
THE STUDY OF EMPLOYEES
IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR

MASTER OF BUSINESS (Honours)

Ho Chi Minh City - Year 2014


UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS HO CHI MINH CITY
International School of Business
------------------------------

DO THI TUYET NHUNG

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
FAIRNESS, WORK ENGAGEMENT,
AND INTENT TO LEAVE:
THE STUDY OF EMPLOYEES
IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR

ID: 21110013

MASTER OF BUSINESS (Honours)
SUPERVISOR: Nguyen Huu Lam, Dr.

Ho Chi Minh City – Year 2014


ACKNOWLEDGE
I would like to express my gratitude to supervisor Dr. Nguyen Huu Lam for his
guidance, support, motivation, and understanding in all the time of my research.
Besides my supervisor, I would like to thank ISB committee for their encouragement,
and insightful comments.
I would like to thank managers in HR Share and Care group and my classmates
at ISB.MBus 2.3 for their sharing honestly in item generation and other phases. They
have provided important comments for my questionnaire as well as data analysis
methods. Especially, I am debted to my classmate Thai Van Trung Hieu for his
supporting and sharing about SEM analysis. In addition, I would like to thank
participants in my investigation without charge.
In my daily work, I have been blessed with my chiefs and staffs at the Joton
JSC for all their supports. Especially, I am obliged to my direct chief Mr. Hoang Minh
Anh for his support and my subordinate Ms Nguyen Thi Hoang Anh for her assistant
at work for me to finish thesis conveniently.
Finally, I would like to give my special thanks to my family whose love helped
me to complete this work.

i


ABSTRACT
While Vietnam builds the Socio-Economic Development Strategy 2011-2020
with paying attention to human resource management and development, many

organizations concern performance management and talent management in which
performance appraisal, work engagement, and intent to leave are important concepts.
The study is conducted to identify whether perceived performance appraisal fairness
can help employees to enhance their engagement at work as well as whether engaged
employees can reduce their intent to leave organizations. A sample of 170 employees
from 15 organizations in the private sector was used to test hypotheses relating to
these three concepts. The results indicated that perceived performance appraisal
fairness affected positively on work engagement and work engagement influenced
negatively to intent to leave in Vietnam context. Generally, the present study suggests
important guidelines for private organizations to ensure fairness of performance
appraisal system; thereby, it can help to enhance work engagement and manage
employee turnover by controlling intent to leave.
Key words: performance appraisal fairness, work engagement, intent to leave

ii


TABLE OF CONTENTS
AKNOWLEDGE ......................................................................................................... i
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................... ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................................................... iii
LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................... v
LIST OF FIRGURES ................................................................................................ vi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................... vii
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 1
1.1. Research Background ....................................................................................... 1
1.2. Research Problem ............................................................................................. 3
1.3. Research Objectives ......................................................................................... 6
1.4. Scope and Contribution of the Study ................................................................ 6
1.5. Thesis Structure ............................................................................................... 7

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................... 8
2.1. Perception of Performance Appraisal Fairness .................................................. 8
2.1.1. Performance Appraisal Overall.................................................................. 8
2.1.2. Fairness of Performance Appraisal System .............................................. 11
2.2. Work Engagement .......................................................................................... 14
2.3. Intent to Leave................................................................................................ 16
2.4. Perceived Performance Appraisal Fairness and Work Engagement................. 18
2.5. Work Engagement and Intent to Leave ........................................................... 20
2.6. The conceptual model and hypotheses of the research .................................... 20
Chapter 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................................................. 22
3.1. Research design .............................................................................................. 22
3.1.1. Research Method ...................................................................................... 22
3.1.2. Research Process ..................................................................................... 23
3.1.3. Population and Sampling Method............................................................. 24
3.1.4. Measurement Instruments......................................................................... 25
3.1.5.Coding ...................................................................................................... 27
3.1.6. Sample Size .............................................................................................. 27
iii


3.1.7. Data Collection ....................................................................................... 28
3.1.8. Data Analysis Method .............................................................................. 28
3.2. Item Generation .............................................................................................. 33
3.3. Pilot Study...................................................................................................... 34
3.4. Main Study ..................................................................................................... 36
Chapter 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ............................................................ 38
4.1. Participants’ Demographic ............................................................................. 38
4.2. Assessment of Scales ...................................................................................... 39
4.2.1. Assessment of Scale by Cronbach’s Alpha Cofficient............................... 40
4.2.2. Assessment of Scale by Exploratory Factor Analysis ................................ 41

4.2.3. Assessment of Scale by Confirmatory Factor Analysis.............................. 42
4.3. Saturated Measurement Model ....................................................................... 45
4.4. Structural Model ............................................................................................. 48
4.4.1. Maximum Likelihood Method ................................................................... 48
4.4.2. Bootstrap Method ..................................................................................... 50
4.5. Testing the Hypotheses ................................................................................... 51
4.6. Discussions for Findings................................................................................. 52
Chapter 5: FINDINGS AND IMPLICATIONS ........................................................ 55
5.1. Conclusions ................................................................................................... 55
5.2. Management Implications............................................................................... 56
5.3. Limitations and Directions for Further Researches ......................................... 57
REFERENCES
APPENDICES

iv


LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1: Characteristics of the participants ............................................................ 38
Table 4.2: Correlation between constructs of perceived performance appraisal fairness 44
Table 4.3: Correlation between research concepts .................................................... 46
Table 4.4: Results of reliability and average variance extracted ............................... 47
Table 4.5: Result of regression weights..................................................................... 49
Table 4.6: Regression weights by maximum likelihood and bootstrap ...................... 50
Table 4.7: Results of testing hypotheses ................................................................... 52

v


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1: Performance appraisal process ................................................................ 10
Figure 2.2: Greenberg's Taxonomy of Justice Perceptions Applied to Performance
Appraisal ............................................................................................... 13
Figure 2.3: The conceptual model ............................................................................. 21
Figure 3.1: Research process ................................................................................... 23
Figure 4.1: CFA for perceived performance appraisal fairness scale ......................... 43
Figure 4.2: CFA for work engagement and intent to leave scale ............................... 45
Figure 4.3: CFA for saturated measurement model ................................................... 47
Figure 4.4: Result of structural equation modeling.................................................... 49

vi


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AMOS

: Analysis of Moment Structures

AVE

: Average variance extracted value

CFA

: Confirmatory Factor Analysis

CR

: Critical ratio value

EFA

: Exploratory Factor Analysis

HRM

: Human resource management

KMO

: Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy

ML

: Maximum Likelihood exploratory program

PAF

: Principal Axis Factoring

PCA

: Principal Component Analysis

SEDS

: The Socio-Economic Development Strategy

SEM

: Structural Equation Modeling

SPSS

: Statistical Packed of Social Sciences

UWES

: Utrecht Work Engagement Scale

vii


Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1.

Research Background
The fact that Viet Nam has been a member of the World Trade Organization

since January 11, 2007 is a successful step in the efforts to integrate into the global
marketplace. The current economic development is believed to be attributable to the
political and economic reforms (Doi Moi), which was launched in 1986 (Nghiep &
Quy, 2000). The new policies have prompted Vietnamese economy from a closed
system into a multi-sector, globally integrated market economy with socialist
characteristics. The World Bank reports that Vietnam has developed from one of the
poorest countries in the world, with per capita income below 100 dollars, to a lower
middle-income country within a quarter of a century with per capita income of 1,130
dollars by the end of 2010 (Vietnam overview, n.d). One of the most remarkable

achievements of Vietnam’s economic transition is the emergence of more dynamic
and stronger private sector (Hakkala & Kokko, 2007). Asian Development Bank
defines the private sector as all individuals or groups of individuals who invest or use
private capital to produce or trade goods or services. Therefore, in Vietnam, this
definition includes formal and informal enterprises and collectives, domestic and
foreign (ADB, 2005). Bartram, Stanton, and Thomas (2009) states that the
Vietnamese government encourages a multi-sector economy and actively promotes
the growth of private enterprises as crucial factors shaping the development of the
economy.

1


As some other emerging economies seeking to compete in globalised markets,
Vietnam is facing many challenges (Truong, Van der Heijden, & Rowley, 2010).
Vietnam’s ability to succeed with low cost strategy is under threat and needs to
change due involving a downward spiral around low cost competition is dangerous
and harmful for long term and with impacts on key human resource management
(HRM) policies and practices (Truong et al., 2010). Vietnam government builds the
Socio-Economic Development Strategy (SEDS) 2011-2020 with paying attention to
structural reforms, environmental sustainability, social equity, and emerging issues of
macroeconomic stability. Three main issues in SEDS include: (i) promoting human
resources/skills development (particularly skills for modern industry and innovation),
(ii) improving market institutions, and (iii) infrastructure development (Vietnam
Overview, n.d). In the SEDS, the human resource development is placed first indicates
that Vietnamese government has concern on the importance of this resource in the
integration process. Obviously, when entering the international arena, the competition
among companies has become unprecedented level by the pressure of globalization,
which is known as the increasingly close international integration of markets for
goods, services and factors of production, labor and capital (Bordo, 2002). More

globalization means more competition “to lower costs, to make employees more
productive, and to do things better and less expensively” (Dessler, 2011, p. 6).
Therefore, to face the pressure of competition, an effective human resources
management has been seen as a critical factor in creating competitive advantage
(Pfeffer, 1999).

2


Under the growing pressure of globalization and integration, HRM in Vietnam
is becoming pragmatic in practices, particularly in relation to the widespread use of
training and development as well as the use of performance appraisal and incentive
payments (Bartram et al., 2009). Private companies in Vietnam are making efforts to
formalize their human resource policies to meet foreign requirements, remain
competition, attract good candidates, and keep talent employees (Bartram et al, 2009).
While many Vietnamese companies apply difficultly foreign HRM theories and
practices to enhance competitiveness, foreign invested companies face the
fundamental question of the transferability of HRM practices into local settings
(Thang, Rowley, Quang & Warner, 2007).
1.2.

Research Problem
In an era of expanding globalization and increasing competition, organizations

worldwide have recognized that the knowledge, skills, and abilities of their employees
represent a major source of competitive advantage (Lewis & Heckman, 2006). Since
the private sector grows and competes openly for experienced and skilled staff, HRM
is assumed as an important function to manage talents (Bartram et al, 2009). In
Vietnam, although many managers in domestic private companies are extremely
interested in experimenting with innovations in HRM (Bartram et al., 2009), the

majority of these applications are still in the first phase of development and generally
lack a strategic HRM focus and positioning (Truong et al., 2010). Whereas, foreign
invested companies need to concern the adoptability of some Western HRM practices
into the Vietnamese context because the import of foreign HRM practices demands a
careful consideration of their compatibility with Vietnamese contexts and cultural
3


values (Thang et al., 2007). In addition, Thang et al. (2007) suggest that the foreign
practices that tend to offer compromise with the norms, beliefs, and assumptions of
the existing Vietnamese culture have the best chance to be transferred to improving
the rigid system in managing and motivating people. Von Glinow and Clarke (as cited
in Thang et al., 2007) also indicate that the attempts to seek confrontation or to impose
ethnocentric practices of HRM will fail, as an early warning for the prospective
American companies aiming to Vietnam. Thang et al. (2007) implicate that
performance management need to take a long-term view and gradually cultivate
among its people a trusting, open and frank environment, as well as provide sufficient
training to bring these knowledge into practice.
When organizations talk about the performance management, they frequently
mention the practice of formal performance appraisal as a primary vehicle for
management change (Longenecker, 1997). Performance appraisal is one of the most
important HRM practices in organizations as it yields critical decisions integral to
various human resource actions and outcomes (Gupta & Kumar, 2013). However,
performance appraisal systems in private companies face many disadvantages in
Vietnam. Long (2007) considers that some Vietnamese companies have allowed
superior to assess performance and attitude of subordinate at the end of the year while
others have used voting method relying on the results of emulation, commendation,
and punishment for ranking employees in each department, and then proposed to the
board of directors for approval. By any manner, performance appraisal in Vietnamese
companies often create controversy, discontent and disunity in the organizations

because the assessment methods are not scientific, not transparent, unfair and results
4


of assessment had often based on comments by emotions, bias of the supervisor
(Long, 2007). Tan (2011) presents that probably more than 80 percent of staff asked
about performance management system will think that this system is unfair,
meaningless, and a waste of time; whereas, many human resource managers are aware
of this issue but ignore and still proceed with their system knowing the actual
consequences and results. Therefore, Tan (2011) warns that the organizations need to
look more closely at their performance management and appraisal systems because
there are many factors, such as obsolete system, wrong design, or poor rating, are not
only useless but can actually harm productivity and the relationships between
employees and managers.
In addition, as conditions have become more competitive, companies face
pressure in recruiting skilled and talented people at the top of the labour market
(Truong et al, 2010). Ruge (2011) shows that employee intent to continue working for
current companies is lower in Vietnam (54%) compared to Asia Pacific (61%). Loose
(2011) suggests that the engagement and retention strategies in Vietnam should focus
on a total reward strategy basing on employee performance beyond just compensation
only historically to attract and retain talents.
Generally, under the pressure of limitation of resources and competition,
private companies need to improve talent management. To deal with turnover,
managers should build human resource strategies how to manage and control turnover
as well as to retain talent. Some previous researches evoke relationship of work
engagement with performance appraisal justice and with intent to leave (Schaufeli &
Bakker, 2004; Saks, 2006; Cropanzano, Bowen, & Gilliland, 2007; Alam &
5

Mohammad, 2009; Gruman & Saks, 2011) in many countries that include transition
economies such as India, Malaysia. While perception of performance appraisal
fairness is believed to significantly influence on work engagement (Gupta & Kumar,
2013), work engagement is received attention from researchers as an important
determinant of employee performance recently (Gruman & Saks, 2011). Therefore, a
study was conducted to examine the relationship between perceived performance
appraisal fairness, work engagement, and intent to leave in Vietnam context under the
pressure of globalization and integration.
1.3.

Research Objectives
The study is undertaken with the following objectives:

1. To identify relationship between perceived performance appraisal fairness and
work engagement
2. To examine relationship between work engagement and intent to leave
1.4.

Scope and Contribution of the Study
The study focused on employees working for local and foreign private

companies in Ho Chi Minh City. The respondents were white-collar officials
including staff and manager, and they have experienced in performance appraisal.
This study provides evidences about the relationship between perceived
performance appraisal fairness, work engagement, and intent to leave in Vietnam
context. Findings from this study can be useful for managerial people to conduct
programs and policies for preparing and maintaining HRM in private organizations.
The clearer understanding of three concepts may help to create stable and engaged
work environment, reduce recruitment cost, and develop competitive advantages.
6

1.5.

Research Structure
This thesis includes five chapters. Chapter 1 introduces research background

and research problems providing general views about Vietnam market. It also states
research objectives and questions, scope and contribution of thesis, thesis structure.
Chapter 2 provides literature review relating to performance appraisal fairness, work
engagement, and intent to leave. From literature, a research model and two hypotheses
are proposed. Chapter 3 gives the research methodology applied to conduct this study.
It includes research process, sampling method, and data analysis method. In this
chapter, the results from item generation and pilot phases are showed specifically.
Chapter 4 is for main study with output data analyzed via statistical software and
discussions based on data analysis. It also gives result of testing hypotheses. Chapter 5
concludes the findings and managerial implications. It also indicates limitations of
study to direct for further researches.

7


Chapter 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter provides literatures for present study. It gives the understanding of
performance appraisal system overall and perception of performance appraisal
fairness from the organizational fairness approach. The concepts of work engagement
and intent to leave are also introduced in this chapter. Moreover, this chapter provides
a research model with two hypotheses used to illustrate predicted relationships of
concepts.

2.1.

Perception of Performance Appraisal Fairness

2.1.1. Performance Appraisal Overall
Definition of Performance Appraisal. Dessler (2011) defines, “Performance
appraisal means evaluating an employee’s current and/or past performance relative to
his or her performance standards” (p. 187). Latham and Wexley (as cited in AlZawahreh & Khasawneh, 2013) define that appraisal is as any personal decision
affecting the status of employee in term of retention, termination, promotion,
demotion, transfer, salary increases or decreases admission into a training program.
Grote and Grote (as cited in Al-Zawahreh & Khasawneh, 2013) define performance
appraisal as a formal management system providing for the evaluation of the quality
of an individual's performance in an organization.
Purpose of Performance Appraisal. Generally, many researchers and experts
concern to two extensive purposes of performance appraisal in organization (Gul &
O'Connell, 2013). Firstly, it serves an administrative purpose in areas, such as reward
allocation (salary raise, bonuses) and assignment decisions (transfers, promotions,
8


demotions). Secondly, it adapts developmental purpose that identifies employee’s
strengths and weakness, provides performance feedback, and facilitates exchange with
managers for improving performance and career development. According to Baruch
(1996), “performance appraisal systems are used for two main purposes: as a source
for information for management; and as a feedback instrument for individuals
employed by the organization” (p. 50). The management purpose is to serve a variety
of management functions such as decision-making about promotions, training needs,
salaries, and so on while the second purpose is to enhance developmental processes of
employees or as an evaluation instrument. This is similar to conceptualization of
Boswell and Boudreau (2000) about two typical performance appraisal uses:

evaluative and developmental. The evaluative function includes the use of
performance appraisal for salary administration, promotion decisions, retentiontermination decisions, recognition of individual performance, layoffs, and the
identification of poor performance. Developmental functions include the identification
of individual training needs, providing performance feedback, determining transfers
and assignments, and the identification of individual strengths and weaknesses.
Dundas (2009) condenses the purpose of performance appraisal into two general
categories, evaluative and developmental. The evaluative purposes include decisions
on pay, promotion, redeployment, retrenchment, and termination. The developmental
purposes

include management development,

career management,

feedback,

improvement, and communications. Longenecker and Fink (1999) argue that there are
two main reasons for performance appraisal. The first reason is to justify human

9


resource decisions such as pay raise, promotion, demotion, termination, and selection
validation. The second reason is to maintain competitive advantage.
Performance Appraisal Process. The following four-step appraisal process
framework presented by Lussier and Hendon (2012) explains how the appraisal
process is carried out and notes the connection between the organization’s mission and
objectives and the performance appraisal process. First step is job analysis to make
what a job consists of clearly. The job must be based on the organizational mission
and objectives, the department, and the job itself. Second step is to give standards of

acceptable behavior and measurement methods. Third step is informal performance
appraisal: coaching and disciplining. As its definition, performance appraisal is an
ongoing process and people need regular feedback on their performance to know how
they are doing. Last step is to prepare for and conduct the formal performance
appraisal once or twice a year using one or more of the measurement.
Step 1:
Job analysis

Organizational mission
and Objectives

Step 2: Develop standards
and measurement methods;
communicate standards to
workforce

Step 4: Prepare for and
conduct the formal
performance appraisal

Step 3: Informal
performance appraisal –
coaching and discipline

Figure 2.1: Performance appraisal process (Lussier & Hendon, 2012)

10


Performance Appraisal Method. Dessler (2011) describes some formal

methods conducted usually. A graphic rating scale method lists a number of traits and
a range of performance for each used to identify the score that best describes an
employee’s level of performance for each trait. Alternation ranking method is to rank
employees from best to worst on a particular trait, choosing highest, then lowest, until
all are ranked. Paired comparison method is to rank employees by making a chart of
all possible pairs of the employees for each trait and indicating which is the better
employee of the pair. With the forced distribution method, manager places
predetermined percentages of subordinates in various performance categories. Critical
incident method requires a supervisor to maintain a log of positive and negative
examples of a subordinate's work-related behavior. Behaviorally anchored rating scale
method uses quantified scale with specific narrative examples of good and poor
performance. Narrative forms method requires the person’s supervisor to provide an
assessment of employee’s past performance and required areas of improvement and
write down into narrative form. Management by objectives method involves setting
specific measurable goals with each employee and then periodically reviewing the
progress made.
2.1.2. Fairness of Performance Appraisal System
Employees want fair dealing in performance appraisal system, which is a vital
component of organization’s HRM. The researcher groups such as Bernardin and
Beatty as well as Latham and Wexley (as cited in Ikramullah, Shah, Sajjad ul Hassan,
Zaman, & Khan, 2011) give that fairness perceptions about various components of
performance appraisal system have very serious implications not only for employees,
11


but also for an organization. Martin and Bartol (as cited in Ikramullah et al., 2011)
state that appraisal system fairness is a significant topic of investigation among
researchers in the field of organizational psychology. Bretz, Milkovich, and Read
(1992) indicate that the most important performance appraisal issue faced by
organizations is perceived fairness of the performance review and the performance

appraisal system. Their findings suggest that most employees perceive their
performance appraisal system as neither accurately nor fairly. Skarlicki and Folger (as
cited in Walsh, 2003) suggest that the appraisal process can become a source of
extreme dissatisfaction when employees believe the system is bias, political, or
irrelevant.
Greenberg (as cited in Thurston, 2001) is one of the first to apply
organizational justice theory to performance evaluation. Greenberg's conceptualization
of the four types of justice provides a basis to the social perceptions related to
organizational justice in systems. It offers the opportunity to more comprehensively
study and organize employees' perceptions of fairness concerning performance
appraisal and appraisal systems. Description of the perceptions of fairness allocated
across the four categories may provide practitioners with valuable information to
better manage the complex system of performance appraisal. Figure 2.2 shows
Greenberg's four-factor taxonomy of justice as applied to performance appraisal. It
includes systemic (procedural) justice, configural (distributive) justice, informational
justice, and interpersonal justice.

12


Socially
Determined

Structurally
Determined

Procedural Justice
Systemic

Distributive Justice

Configural

Concerns about procedures to Concerns about the norms that lead to
assign raters, set criteria, gather ratings and the connection of ratings to
information and seek appeals

administrative actions

Informational

Interpersonal

Concerns about the way raters Concerns about the treatment that
communicate with their rates

ratees receive from their raters

Figure 2.2: Greenberg's Taxonomy of Justice Perceptions Applied to Performance
Appraisal (as cited in Thurston, 2001)

Configural justice perceptions (structural-distributive) can be applied to the
decision norms associated with performance appraisals including equity and political
pressures as well as to the relationships between performance appraisal and
subsequent administrative decisions. A performance appraisal judgment (configural)
based on the quality of an employee’s work according to set performance standards
(systemic) is considered fair based on the norm of equity in the performance
evaluation context (Leventhal, as cited in Thurston, 2001). Distributive justice refers
to the fairness of outcomes or final decisions in comparison to what others receive
(Colquitt, Conlon, Wesson, Porter, & Ng, 2001).
The social dimensions of appraisal practices can be represented by

interpersonal and informational justice perceptions. Perceptions of the way that the
rater treats the person being evaluated, such as with respect and sensitivity, concerns
interpersonal justice (social-procedural). Interpersonal justice can take the form any
social rewards provided by the supervisor. Informational justice (social-procedural)
reflects fairness perceptions based on the clarification of performance expectations
and standards, feedback received, and explanation and justification of decisions. An
13


adequate explanation (informational) clarifying performance expectations or a rating
is considered fair based on the interactional/social component.
2.2.

Work Engagement
The concept of work engagement is becoming more popularly in today’s

workplace. Salanova (as cited in Gruman & Saks, 2011) claims that engagement is
essential for contemporary organizations to face challenges and Macey, Schneider,
Barbera, and Young (as cited in Gruman & Saks, 2011) argue that organizations can
enhance competitive advantage through engagement.
Kahn (1990) identifies the engagement term through introducing the concepts
of personal engagement. Kahn (1990) defines personal engagement as “the harnessing
of organization members’ selves to their work roles; in engagement, people employ
and express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally during role
performances” (p. 694). With this definition, Kahn (1990) notes that personal
engagement refers to the behaviors which people bring in or leave out their personal
selves during working role performances. Kahn (1990) states personal engagement as
“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 performances” (p. 700). People

exhibit engagement when they are physically involved in tasks, whether by
themselves or with others; are cognitively vigilant, focused, and attentive; and are
emotionally connected to their work and to others in the service of their work (Kahn,
1990). Schaufeli, Salanova, Gonzalez-Roma, and Bakker (2002) note although Kahn
(1990) presents a comprehensive theoretical model of psychological presence but not
14


propose an operationalization of the construct. Rich, Lepine, and Crawford (2010)
build on Kahn’s (1990) dimensions of physical, emotional, and cognitive engagement
but proposed a 18-item scale to measure the these dimensions in such a way that the
commonality of those dimensions adequately reflect job engagement.
Leiter and Maslach (as cited in Simpson, 2009) define burnout as a
psychological syndrome characterized by exhaustion, cynicism, and inefficacy, which
is experienced in response to chronic job stressors; whereas engagement is understood
to be the direct opposite of burnout and exist on a continuum. Exhaustion (low
energy), cynicism (low involvement), and inefficacy (low efficacy) are characteristic
of burnout; whereas, high energy, high involvement, and high efficacy are
characteristic of engagement (Leiter & Maslach, as cited in Simpson, 2009). Engaged
employees have a sense of energetic and effective connection with their work
activities and they see themselves available to deal completely with the demands of
their job (Leiter & Maslach, as cited in Simpson, 2009).Whereas, Schaufeli et al.
(2002) argue burnout and engagement are distinct concepts, thereby warranting
independent assessment of one another. Acknowledging engagement and burnout to
be opposite psychological states that can be measured independently with different
instruments, Schaufeli et al. (2002) suggest that an employee who experiences low
burnout may not be experiencing high engagement. Likewise, an employee who is
highly engaged may not also be experiencing low burnout.
Schaufeli et al. (2002) define work engagement as “a positive, fulfilling, workrelated state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption” (p.74).
Schaufeli, Bakker, and Salanova (2006) explain these three components as following:

15


Vigor is characterized by high levels of energy and mental resilience while
working, the willingness to invest effort in one’s work, and persistence even
in the face of difficulties. Dedication refers to being strongly involved in
one’s work and experiencing a sense of significance, enthusiasm,
inspiration, pride, and challenge. Finally, absorption is characterized by
being fully concentrated and happily engrossed in one’s work, whereby
time passes quickly and one has difficulties with detaching oneself from
work (p. 702).
According to Schaufeli and Bakker (2004), engagement derives from access to
job resources in the workplace, and serves as a motivational factor for employee
performance, and then this subsequently leads to greater work satisfaction and
commitment to the organization. Engagement is viewed as the opposite of job
burnout, a phenomenon resulting from heavy job demands in the presence of
insufficient resources to meet these demands, and is linked to positive health and wellbeing (lower depression and fewer physical complaints). Schaufeli et al. (2002)
suggest the original 17-item Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-17), a selfreport questionnaire, to measure three aspects of work engagement: vigor, dedication,
and absorption. However, Schaufeli, Bakker, and Salanova (2006) shorten it into a 9item questionnaire (UWES-9).
2.3.

Intent to Leave
With organizations is facing recruitment challenges today, it is even more

critical to develop new strategies for reducing employee turnover. Horn and Kinichi
(as cited in Henryhand, 2009) believe turnover has a significant adverse effect on
16