Drivers of Employee Engagement - Aon Hewitt’s Employee Engagement Model

Employee engagement is a concept that has gained traction in the last decade and is considered one of the fundamental goals of a talent strategy, and many companies use the term "employee engagement" to describe an important category that goes beyond job satisfaction (Markos and Sridevi, 2010). Companies today use engaged employees as strategic partners in business (Sundaray, 2011) Employee engagement is even more important now that many factors influencing employee performance and workplace well-being have been identified. Employee physical and mental health is one of the most important factors that human resource managers must consider as businesses in all industries strive to survive and differentiate themselves from fierce competition. As a result, in today's turbulent times, employee engagement is regarded as a potent source of competitive advantage (Bedarkar and Pandita, 2014). Due to this reason, many companies use employee satisfaction surveys to measure employee engagement, and in view of this, for effective engagement research, reliability and validity are considered the most essential components (Sun & Bunchapattanasakda, 2019). Most employee engagement models assume that engagement is necessary for a successful organization. The AON Hewitt model of employee engagement examines the concept of employee involvement and analyzes three areas in depth: Communication, Work-life balance, and Leadership. It also examines how these factors affect employee performance levels and employee well-being in the workplace. There is little literature on these three drivers and their impact on employee engagement, according to the available literature on the drivers of employee engagement and Aon Hewitt is a step further by explicitly incorporating this link into their model via the concept of engagement outcomes (Aon Hewitt, 2015)

Figure 1 - Aon Hewitt's Employee engagement model (Aon Hewitt, 2015)

According to the Aon-Hewitt model outlined above, engaging has both individual and organizational benefits. Employee involvement is defined as the outcomes of mental and physical involvement that contribute to organizational productivity gains. There are widely accepted academic theories of engagement, including emotional engagement, motivation, and organizational citizenship behavior (Bedarkar and Pandita, 2014). A rational combination of thoughts, emotions, intentions, and actions is essential for maximum performance and productivity. As illustrated in the model, AON operationalizes employee engagement as a six-item structure, also the model defines engagement as "the emotional and intellectual commitment” of individuals to an organization or team, as designed by three primary behaviors of "Say, Stay, and Strive”.  Hence, to be called "engaged," an employee must demonstrate all three aspects of behavior types and these discoveries have several significant consequences as employees who "Say, Stay and strive" are more valuable to a company as they strive to their full potential. (Macey & Schneider, 2008).

Say - Employees promote the organization to others both inside and outside the organization. Employees who are engaged become brand ambassadors for the company. Their enthusiasm and faith are evident in what they say about the company, both internally and externally (Bedarkar and Pandita, 2014) 

Stay - Employees show a strong desire to be a part of the organization  (Bedarkar and Pandita, 2014). Turnover is a significant indicator of employee engagement and is extremely costly for any business. (Pritchard, K., 2008). These aspects are connected to "continuance commitment," and research proves that the "stay" factor is not maintained in employee engagement as workplace loyalty declines rapidly. (Esmaeilirad and Samei, 2015) 

Strive -  is most compatible with a definition beyond employee pleasure that indicates "discretionary effort" or "going above and beyond,". Not all engagement measures incorporate this feature. "Strive" is a key characteristic of a good engagement measure, but it could also have some unique predictive ability for the participants 

Based on the research done by Macey & Schneider, (2008), organization leaders need to coordinate six engagement drivers to achieve the desired engagement results. These elements can be categorized as engagement drivers that differentiate them from the employee's basic requirements. Major Engagement Drivers as illustrated in the model -

•   Basic Needs: Employees want to be cared for and have a proper work-life balance. Meet your basic needs and improve employee retention. The balance between work and life is frequently misunderstood, but employees seek guidance and support from their employers to manage their non-work life areas. 

•  Company practices: The organizations day-to-day operations, programs, and initiatives should encourage employees to stay and strive. 

•   The Work: Employees feel that they are challenged by their job and at the same time need the right resources to perform at their best. 

•   The Brand: The way an organization is recognized as a key to employee involvement. Keeping a strong brand image is critical to achieving sag engagement results. For example, at the Arline I'm currently being attached to, employees are more enthusiastic about their work because they belong to a reputable organization that has more corporate responsibility in the country. They form an emotional bond with the airline because the company places employee involvement at the heart of its business strategy sets clear expectations, and provides them with the necessary tools to support and motivate the employers to do their best work.

•  Leadership: When organizational leadership is actively involved in a company's mission and corporate life, employees are much more likely to speak, stay, and strive. Managerial and mentoring behaviors such as ingraining trust in followers, power-sharing, communication, role modeling, and vision articulation, for example, can be described as inspirational, visionary, decisive, and team-oriented..

•   Performance assessment: Awareness is essential for employee involvement. When employees stay and strive, they need to know that contributions are important, regardless of their role. As an example, Promoting employees creates employee satisfaction and motivation by giving them more income, status, and responsibility. 

(Padhi, Panda, and Kumar, 2015)

Despite diverse factors, companies are however find it increasingly challenging to attract and keep talented employees due to demographic transition and the unfavorable economic environment with low unemployment rates. Compared to small and medium-sized firms (SMEs), large multinational corporations (e.g., Google, Microsoft, Apple) are considered modern and attractive employers who are able to hire and retain employees far more easily than SMEs. Often referred to as "hidden champions," small and medium-sized firms (SMEs) are economically successful but go unnoticed as a brand, and as a source of employment opportunities, while well-known brands and associations including Google, Microsoft, and Apple, have no trouble filling all their openings with the most qualified individuals. On the one hand, the pool of qualified individuals is becoming increasingly limited in size. Meanwhile, the number of competent applicants is growing. On the other hand, for the vast majority of employees, the level of competition for this pool of workers is becoming increasingly high (Little & Little, 2006)

Companies need to provide their employees the freedom to excite their work and at the same time create an environment that is useful for their work life. As explained by Parkes and Langford, (2008) employees are the most valuable asset of any organization, and if they are not given the right space and time to achieve a harmonious work-life balance in the workplace, it can develop a sense of separation. Both the organization and its people depend on each other to achieve their goals and objectives. Therefore, employee involvement should be rooted in corporate culture, not a one-off event. Employee involvement should be a never-ending cycle of learning, improvement, and action. Therefore, today's organizations need to be proactive in meeting the expectations of their employees in order to transform the employees.

 

References

• Aon Hewwit, 2015. [Online]. Available at https://www.academia.edu/34109036/Aon_Hewitts_Model_of_Employee_Engagement [Accessed on 15th April 2022].

• Bedarkar, M. and Pandita, D., 2014. A study on the drivers of employee engagement impacting employee performance. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 133, pp.106-115

• Rawat, P.A. and Dadas, A.B., 2019. A study of employee engagement models to build new business approaches. Neville Wadia Institute of Management Studies & Research.

• Esmaeilirad, M. and Samei, R., 2015. The relationship between perceived organizational support and organizational commitment. International Reseacrh Journal of Management Sciences, 3(7), p.288.

• Little, B. & Little, P., 2006. Employee engagement: Conceptual issues. Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict, 10(1), pp. 111-120

• Macey, W. H. & Schneider, B., 2008. The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and organizational Psychology, 1(1), pp. 3-30.

• Markos, S. and Sridevi, M.S., 2010. Employee engagement: The key to improving performance. International journal of business and management, 5(12), p.89.

• Padhi, B., Panda, D. and Kumar, A., 2015. A study on employee engagement models for sustainability of organisation. Padhi, B. and Panda, AK (2015)." A Study on Employee Engagement Models for Sustainability of Organisation". International Journal of Research and Development-A Management Review (IJRDMR), 4(4), pp.79-85.

• Parkes, L.P. and Langford, P.H., 2008. Work–life bal ance or work–life alignment? A test of the importance of work-life balance for employee engagement and intention to stay in organisations. Journal of management & organization, 14(3), pp.267-284.

• Pritchard, K., 2008. Effectively measure employee engagement. Strategic HR Review

• Sundaray, B.K., 2011. Employee engagement: a driver of organizational effectiveness. European Journal of Business and Management, 3(8), pp.53-59Sun, L. & Bunchapattanasakda, C., 2019. Employee engagement: A literature review. International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 9(1), pp. 63-80.