Employee Engagement in Theory and Practice by Unknown

Author:Unknown
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 978-1-135-12863-0
Publisher: Routledge

The relational context for engagement

Leadership and followership are embedded within the social fabric of an organization. Some perspectives on leadership have characterized the relationship as a one-way, downward flow of information. An alternative approach is to de-emphasize the hierarchical boundaries between leaders and followers, and to consider leadership as a relational construct that requires an understanding of followers and the followership process (Awamleh and Gardner, 1999). Just as leadership is concerned with connectedness, social embeddedness is fundamental to engagement (discussed further in Chapter 4). William Kahn’s 1990 work on engagement remains the lodestone for the field. Kahn (1990) suggested that the experience of connectedness with others is critical to the expression of self-in-role that forms the basis of engagement. Conversely, lack of social connectedness can be associated with disengagement. For example, Kahn quotes a camp counsellor who said: ‘I was really shut down, not letting loose or being funny or letting them get close to me by talking more about myself. I just didn’t let them in, I guess’ (Kahn, 1990: 702). For Kahn, there is clearly a social dimension to engagement that is linked up with connectedness and empathy, a willingness to share views and to work collaboratively.

Social Exchange Theory (SET, Blau, 1964) provides a theoretical framework for Kahn’s observations. SET emphasizes the fundamental nature of social reciprocation. Applications of SET to the work context support the notion that many organizational behaviours rely upon meaningful social exchange. Studies have examined a range of contexts including information sharing (Kankanhalli, Tan and Kwok-Kee, 2005), the outcomes of working partnerships (Lee and Kim, 1999) and relationships between leaders and followers (Hooper and Martin, 2008; Nelson and Dyck, 2005). Focusing on engagement, Saks (2006) suggested that SET can explain how individuals respond to work conditions with differing levels of engagement depending on norms of reciprocity and interdependence. Although most published measures of engagement do not specify a social dimension, I have suggested that the social dimension is critical to the conceptualization and operationalization of engagement for the reasons outlined above.

Building on our construction of engagement, and Social Exchange Theory (Blau, 1964), we can extend frameworks of leadership to encompass the relational exchanges between leaders and followers. Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX, Graen and Cashman, 1975) is a relevant framework. LMX proposed that interactions between leaders and members influence the development of mutual relationships, and that the quality of relationship between leader and member may differ from one member to another. High-quality relationships are underpinned by liking, trust and mutual respect. Development of high quality relationships is beneficial to both parties. As the norm of reciprocity (Gouldner, 1960) suggests, followers feel empowered in the light of a strong relationship with their leader and this builds a sense of obligation to reciprocate through high levels of effort and attainment (Graen and Uhl-Bien, 1995).

LMX theory has been tested in numerous empirical studies, and there is support for the influence of positive LMX on beneficial outcomes (e.g. Liden, Sparrowe and Wayne, 1997). However, there is little research that provides a direct test of the association between LMX and engagement.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.