Kansas State University, School of Leadership Studies, Manhattan, KS 66506-6800, USA.
Kansas State University, USAHofstra University, USASouthern Illinois University Carbondale, USA.
Appl Psychol Health Well Being. 2012 Mar;4(1):67-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1758-0854.2011.01059.x. Epub 2011 Oct 27.
Engagement is an emerging job attitude that purports to measure employees' psychological presence at and involvement in their work. This research compares three academic approaches to engagement, and makes recommendations regarding the most appropriate conceptualisation and measurement of the construct in future research. The current research also investigates whether any of these three approaches to engagement contribute unique variance to the prediction of turnover intentions above and beyond the predictive capacity of alternative constructs.
An online survey was taken by 382 employees and managers from a mid-sized financial institution.
Results failed to support either a multi- or unidimensional factor structure for the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) engagement measure. For the Shirom-Melamed Vigor Measure (SMVM), a multi-dimensional structure was identified as a good fit, while a unidimensional structure fit poorly. The uni-factorial structure of Britt's engagement measure was confirmed. The Schaufeli measure of engagement was a strong predictor of work outcomes; however, when controlling for job satisfaction and affective commitment, that measure lost its ability to predict intentions to leave. Two components of the Shirom vigor measure held their predictive validity.
Collectively, these findings suggest that the Shirom vigor measure may provide better insight into whether and how much a person is 'into' his or her job. The Schaufeli measure was a good predictor of important work outcomes, but when job satisfaction and affective commitment were controlled, it lost its predictive validity. We were not able to confirm the three-factor structure of the Schaufeli measure. Two components of the Shirom vigor measure predicted turnover intentions after controlling for job satisfaction and affective commitment, suggesting less overlap with those constructs than the Schaufeli measure of engagement. This research adds important information on the nature of engagement and is expected to contribute toward a better understanding of the construct itself, as well as its measurement.
敬业度是一种新兴的工作态度，旨在衡量员工在工作中的心理投入和参与度。本研究比较了敬业度的三种学术方法，并就未来研究中该构念的最合适概念化和测量提出了建议。本研究还调查了这三种敬业度方法中的任何一种方法是否能为离职意向的预测提供独特的方差，超过替代构念的预测能力。
一家中型金融机构的 382 名员工和管理人员在线完成了一项调查。
结果不支持 Utrecht 工作投入量表（UWES）敬业度测量的多维度或单维度因素结构。对于 Shirom-Melamed 活力量表（SMVM），多维度结构被认为是一个很好的拟合，而单维度结构拟合不佳。 Britt 敬业度量表的单因素结构得到了确认。敬业度量表是工作结果的有力预测指标；然而，在控制了工作满意度和情感承诺后，该测量方法失去了预测离职意向的能力。 Shirom 活力量表的两个组成部分保持了其预测效度。
总的来说，这些发现表明，Shirom 活力量表可能更能深入了解一个人是否“投入”他或她的工作，以及投入的程度。Schaufeli 敬业度量表是重要工作结果的良好预测指标，但当控制了工作满意度和情感承诺后，它就失去了预测效度。我们无法证实 Schaufeli 敬业度量表的三因素结构。 Shirom 活力量表的两个组成部分在控制了工作满意度和情感承诺后预测了离职意向，这表明与这些构念的重叠程度低于 Schaufeli 敬业度量表。这项研究增加了关于敬业度本质的重要信息，有望增进对该构念本身及其测量的理解。
