THE EFFECT OF WORK ENGAGEMENT ON PERCEIVED BUSINESS PERFORMANCE: COMPARISONS BETWEEN MANUFACTURING AND SERVICE SECTORS

Öz

Conditions of rapid change force businesses to increase their competitiveness. To increase their competitiveness, businesses are trying to make human resources more effective and efficient as well as harmonizing their improved physical and financial opportunities. The fact that the employee is committed to the job with vigorous energy and dedication from the very first day is an indicator of the high level of work engagement. It is considered that a high level of engagement will increase the competitiveness of the enterprise by positively affecting the business’s overall performance. The level of job engagement of employees in the manufacturing or service sector differs and changes according to gender, age, and seniority are considered in the research. Within the scope of the study, a survey was conducted among employees in various companies, both located in the service and manufacturing sectors, to investigate the effect of the level of job engagement on the perceived business performance. As the results of the survey were analyzed positive relation was found between work engagement and business performance perceived by the employees but no significant difference between the manufacturing and service sectors. The research has been expanded to obtain whether there is a relationship between age, gender, and seniority, as well as the perceived business performance of the sectors employed and the level of work engagement. According to the results obtained, and the relationship between the level of work engagement and performance, it has been determined that the younger have higher work engagement and perceived business performance levels.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• work engagement
• burnout
• business performance
• competition
• seniority

THE EFFECT OF WORK ENGAGEMENT ON PERCEIVED BUSINESS PERFORMANCE: COMPARISONS BETWEEN MANUFACTURING AND SERVICE SECTORS

Abstract

Conditions of rapid change force businesses to increase their competitiveness. To increase their competitiveness, businesses are trying to make human resources more effective and efficient as well as harmonizing their improved physical and financial opportunities. The fact that the employee is committed to the job with vigorous energy and dedication from the very first day is an indicator of the high level of work engagement. It is considered that a high level of engagement will increase the competitiveness of the enterprise by positively affecting the business’s overall performance. The purpose of this study is to determine whether the level of job engagement of employees in the manufacturing or service sector differs according to gender, age and seniority.. Within the scope of the study, a survey was conducted among employees in various companies, both located in the service and manufacturing sectors, to investigate the effect of the level of job engagement on the perceived business performance. As the results of the survey were analyzed positive relation was found between work engagement and business performance perceived by the employees but no significant difference between the manufacturing and service sectors. The research has been expanded to obtain whether there is a relationship between age, gender, and seniority, as well as the perceived business performance of the sectors employed and the level of work engagement. According to the results obtained, and the relationship between the level of work engagement and performance, it has been determined that the younger have higher work engagement and perceived business performance levels.

Keywords

• work engagement
• business performance
• competition
• seniority

Kaynakça

1. Akal, Z. (2002). İşletmelerde Performans Ölçüm ve Denetimi. Ankara: MPM Yayınları.
2. Ardıç, K. and Polatçı, S. (2009). Tükenmişlik sendromu ve madalyonun öbür yüzü: işle bütünleşme. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 32, 21-46.
3. Arslan, E. T. and Demir, H. (2017). İşe angaje olma ve iş tatmini arasındaki ilişki: hekim ve hemşireler üzerine nicel bir araştırma. Yönetim ve Ekonomi. Celal Bayar Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 24(2), 371-389
4. Bakker, A.B., Albrecht, S.L. and Leiter, M.P. (2011). Key questions regarding work engagement. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20(1), 4-28.
5. Bakker, A.B., Demerouti E. and Sanz-Vegel A.I. (2014). Burnout and work engagement: The JD–R Approach. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 2014. 1:389–411
6. Bakker A.B. and Hakanen J.J. (2013). Work engagement among public and private sector dentists. Human Resource Management in the Public Sector. pp:109–131.
7. Bakker, A.B., Westman, M., and Van Emmerik, I.Y.H., (2009). Advancements in crossover theory, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24 (3), 206-219.
8. Bakoğlu, R. (2001). Örgütsel performans kavramı ve gelişimi. Öneri Dergisi 4 (15): 39–45.

9. Bal, E. A. (2009). Bir pozitif psikoloji kavramı olarak işe gönülden adanma (work engagement) ve insan kaynakları açısından önemi. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İşletme Bölümü 17. Ulusal Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresi, 21-23 Mayıs, 546-552.
10. Banihani, M., Lewis, P. and Syed, J. (2013), Is work engagement gendered? Gender in Management, Vol. 28 No. 7, pp. 400-423. https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-01-2013-0005
11. Bartlett, L., Buscot, M. J., Bindoff, A., Chambers, R., & Hassed, C. (2021). Mindfulness Is Associated With Lower Stress and Higher Work Engagement in a Large Sample of MOOC Participants. Frontiers in psychology, 3924.
12. Beckers, D. G., van der Linden, D., Smulders, P. G., Kompier, M. A., van Veldhoven, M. J., and van Yperen, N. W. (2004). Working overtime hours: relations with fatigue, work motivation, and the quality of work. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 1282-1289.
13. Bilginoğlu, E. and Yozgat U. (2019) Ultra-kısa işe angaje olma ölçeği Türkçe formunun geçerlilik ve güvenilirlik çalışması, Business & Management Studies: An International Journal Vol.:7 Issue:5 pp. 2863-2872.
14. Borst, R. T., Kruyen, P. M., Lako, C. J., and de Vries, M. S. (2020). The attitudinal, behavioral, and performance outcomes of work engagement: a comparative meta-analysis across the public, semipublic, and private sector. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 40 (4), 613-640. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X19840399
15. Camgöz, S. M., Ekmekci O.T., and Karapinar P. B. (2016). Job insecurity and turnover intentions: gender differences and the mediating role of work engagement. Sex Roles 75, 583–598. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0595-0
16. Çiftçi, G., (2015). Turizm işletmelerinde kriz yönetimi uygulamalarının örgütsel öürenme ve işletme performansı açısından ampirik olarak analizi, (Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Namık Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. Tekirdağ.
17. Dalay, G. (2007). The relationship between the variables of organizational trust, job engagement, organizational commitment, and job involvement. (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Marmara Üniversitesi. İstanbul.
18. Dhir, S. and Shukla A. (2018). The influence of personal and organizational characteristics on employee engagement and performance. International Journal of Management Concepts and Philosophy Vol. 11, No. 2
19. Eccles, R. G. (1991, January-February). The performance measurement manifesto. Harvard Business Review. 131–137.
20. Erdem, B., Gökdeniz, A. and Met, Ö. (2011). Yenilikçilik ve işletme performansı ilişkisi: antalya’da etkinlik gösteren 5 yıldızlı otel işletmeleri örneği Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt:26, Sayı:2, ss.77-112.
21. Freudenberger, HJ. 1974. Staff burnout. J. Soc. Issues 30:159–65.
22. Fuentes-Fuentes, M. M., Albacete-Sáez, C. A., and Lloréns-Montes, F. J. (2004). The impact of environmental characteristics on TQM principles and organizational performance. Omega, 32(6), 425-442.
23. Gallup (2017). State of the global workplace. [date of access 06.12.2020]. https://www.gallup.com/workplace/238079/state-global-workplace-2017.aspx
24. Göztür, E. (2000). Performans yönetim sistemi ve amaçlara göre yönetim (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. İstanbul.
25. Guest, D. and Hogue, K., (1994, November). Yes, personnel does make a difference. Personnel Management.
26. Gupta S. and Zeithaml V. (2006). Customer metrics and their impact on financial performance. Marketing Science. vol. 25, issue 6, 718-739
27. Güneşer, A. B. (2007). The effect of person-organization fit on organizational commitment and work engagement: the role of person-supervisor fit. (Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Marmara Üniversitesi. İstanbul.
28. Güzel, Ş, and Uyar S., (2019). Tükenmişliğin antitezi işe angaje olmak: kavramsal açıdan bir inceleme. Sosyal Araştırmalar ve Yönetim Dergisi (SAYOD). Sayı:1, 44-52,
29. Homburg, C., Krohmer, H. and Workman, J. (1999). Strategic consensus and performance: the role of strategy type and market-related dynamism. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 339-357.
30. Huselid, M., (1995). The impact of human resources management on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, vol.38. pp.630-18.
31. Kennerley, M. and Neely, A. (2002). A framework of the factors affecting the evaluation of performance measurement systems. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 22 (11): 1222–1245.
32. Länge, A. (2003). Burnout: existential meaning and possibilities of prevention. Eur. Psychother. 4:107–121.
33. Lee, Y, and Eissenstat, SJ. (2018). An application of work engagement in the job demands–resources model to career development: Assessing gender differences. Human Resource Development Quarterly. 29: 143– 161. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21310
34. Marangoz, M. and Biber L., (2007). A Research On Analysing the Relationship Between Businesses, Market Performance and Human Resources Applications Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 8 (2) sf.202-217.
35. Markos, S. and Sridevi M. S. (2010). Employee engagement: the key to improving performance. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(12), 89-96.
36. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B. and Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Reviews, 52, 397-422.
37. Metin, Ü. B. (2010). The antecedents and consequences of burnout, work engagement and workaholism. (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi) Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi. Ankara.
38. Michalisin, M. D., Karau, S. J. and Tangpong, C. (2004). The effects of performance and team cohesion on attribution: a longitudinal simulation. Journal of Business Research 57 (10): 1108-1115.
39. Montoya, W. and Calantone, R. (1994). Determinants of new product performance: a review and meta-analysis. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 11 (5): 397–417.
40. Motyka, B. (2018). Employee engagement and performance: a systematic literature review. International Journal of Management and Economics, 54(3), 227-244.
41. Nicholas, J. M. (1998). Competitive Manufacturing Management. USA: McGraw-Hill International Editions, Management & Organization Series
42. Özkalp, E. and Meydan, B. (2015). Schaufeli ve Bakker tarafından geliştirilmiş olan işe angaje olma ölçeğinin türkçe’de güvenilirlik ve geçerliliğinin analizi, İş, Güç Endüstri İlişkileri ve İnsan Kaynakları Dergisi, 17(3), 4-19.
43. Phillips, P. A. (1999). Performance measurement systems and hotels: a new conceptual framework. Hospitality Management (18): 171–182.
44. Pines, A. M. and Aronson, E. (1988). Career burnout: Causes and cures. New York: Free Press.
45. Reiner, G. (2004). Customer-oriented improvement and evaluation of supply chain processes supported by simulation models. International Journal of Production Economics (22): 381–395.
46. Robinson, D., Perryman, S. and Hayday, S. (2004). The drivers of employee engagement. Institute for Employment Studies.
47. Sarıkaya, N. (2002). Kalite iyileştirme faaliyetlerinin algılanmasının işletme performansı üzerindeki etkilerinin incelenmesi ve Türkiye uygulaması. (Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Sakarya Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. Sakarya.
48. Öner, Z. H. (2008). The mediating effect of organizational justice: moderating roles of sense of coherence and job complexity on the relationship between servant leadership and work engagement. (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Marmara Üniversitesi. İstanbul.
49. Özer, Ö., Saygılı, M. and Uğurluoğlu, Ö. (2015). Sağlık çalışanlarının işe cezbolma düzeylerinin belirlenmesine ilişkin bir araştırma. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 3(3), 261-272
50. Roberts, K., (1995). The proof of HR is in the profit. People Management, vol.42
51. Roos, G., Fernström, L. and Pike, S., (2004). Human resource management and business performance measurement. Measuring Business Excellence, vol.8, no.1, pp. 28-37.
52. Schaufeli W. B. and Bakker, A. (2004, December). UWES Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. [Version 1.1, December2004] https://www.wilmarschaufeli.nl/publications/Schaufeli/Test%20Manuals/ Test_manual_UWES_English.pdf [Access date 28.07.2019].
53. Schaufeli, W. S., M. Gonzalez-Roma, V. and Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: a two-sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. The Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71-92.
54. Şanliöz, E., Sağbaş, M., and Sürücü, L. (2022). The Mediating Role of Perceived Organizational Support in the Impact of Work Engagement on Job Performance. Hospital Topics, 1-14
55. Tuna, B. (2009). Understanding the relationship between transformational, transactional leadership and affective commitment, work engagement. (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi) Yeditepe Üniversitesi. İstanbul.
56. Turgut, T. (2011). Çalışmaya Tutkunluk. (Ed. Güler İslamoğlu), 1. Baskı, Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
57. Ünal, Z. M. (2013). The contribution of person-organization fit to employee engagement (Doctoral dissertation, Marmara Universitesi (Turkey)).
58. Venkatraman N. and Ramanujan V. (1986) “Measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparison of approaches”, Academy of Management Review, 11(4), ss.801-14.
59. Wright M. P. and Boswell, R. W., (2002). Desegregating HRM: a review and synthesis of micro and macro human resource management research. Journal of Management, vol.3. pp.250-9.