Impact of Psychological Empowerment and Perceived Career

Support on Employee Work Engagement with mediating role

of Affective Commitment

Chapter No. 1
Introduction
1.1Background of the research
Employee engagement in their work is such emerging concept, which is considered an essential
and critical element in the success of a business (Strom, sears & Kelly, 2014). Moreover, this
engagement of employees has its positive association with different individual and
organizational output e.g. productivity and turnover of business, improvement or citizenship
behaviors of an organization, effectiveness of management and customer satisfaction (Blomme,
Kodden & Beasley Suffolk, 2015). On other side disengagement of employees in their work
causes the reduction in productivity and increase of the cost (Suk, Thi Bich & Byung, 2015).
There are many statistical proofs, which are showing that employee engagement is related with
different individual and organizational output (Geeth & Sebastian, 2014). Employee
engagement has risen as crucial and important factor for a success of a business (Slatten and
Mehmetoglu, 2011). Scholars have discussed and found in their studies that employee
engagement at high level has direct (Positive) influence on employees well-being (Satisfaction)
and negatively (Inverserly) associated with their intention to quit the job (Schaufeli & Bakker,
2004). According to Saks (2006) job engagement has positive influence on the employee’s
satisfaction with their job, commitment of employees with their organization and negative
impact on burnout. The research on the factors, which have their impact on employee’s
engagement in their work are necessary to enhance the performance of an organization
(Blomme et al., 2015). Therefore, employee engagement is an important issue for research for
which the factors, which have their influence on employee’s engagement are going to be
included in this study.

1.2Identification of Gap
A study carried out by Geetha, Sebastian (2014) regarding prediction of employee engagement
by using the aspects of psychological empowerment. The meaning, competence, self-
determination and impact have been used as the dimensions of the psychological
empowerment. The primary data has been gathered from 101 employees of the organizations
engaged in services matter situated in central Kerala. The finding of the research elaborated
that all the dimensions except self-determination have their positive and significant influence
on employee engagement in an organization. The study has it focus to investigate the influence
of psychological empowerment on employee engagement and the study suggested to pin point
other determinants of employee engagement in future studies. Furthermore, the study has also
suggested taking into account the demographic variables in the relationship of the variables
used in the study. Another study has been conducted by June (2013) in Malaysia pertaining to
impact of perceived career support on employee engagement with mediating effect of affective
commitment. The results are elaborating that affective commitment is showing mediating
influence between the relationship of perceived support career and employee engagement.
However, this study suggests that other commitments (Continuance and normative) may be
used as mediators or searched others as moderators. By keeping in view the gaps found in
above studies. The model for future study has been constructed to fill the said gap.

1.3Significance of the research

 The study will be helpful for the management to explore the factors, which have their
influence on employee’s engagement.
 The results of the study will be helpful for the management how much they should focus
on the variables of the study, which are necessary to engage the employees in their
work.
1.4 Problem statement
The research is going to conduct to explore the influence of perceived support and
psychological empowerment on employees’ engagement while analyzing the mediator role of
affective commitment.

1.5 Objectives of the study

 To investigate the influence of perceived career support on employees engagement.

 To check the impact of Psychological empowerment on employees engagement.
 To check the impression of Affective commitment on employees engagement.
 To investigate the effect of perceived career support on Affective commitment
 To investigate the influence of Psychological commitment on Affective commitment.
 To check the mediating role of Affective commitment between the relationship of
Perceived career support and work engagement.
  To check the mediating role of Affective commitment between the relationship of
Psychological empowerment and work engagement

1.6Questions of the research

 What is the influence of perceived career support on employee’s engagement?

 What is the impact of Psychological empowerment on employee’s engagement?
 What is the impression of Affective commitment on employee’s engagement?
 What is the effect of perceived career support on Affective commitment?
 What is the influence of Psychological commitment on Affective commitment?
 Is Affective commitment has mediating effect between the relationship of Perceived
career support and work engagement?
 Is Affective commitment between the relationship of Psychological empowerment and
work engagement?
 Chapter No. 2

Literature Review
2.1 Employee Engagement

Employee engagement is very important and rising concept in the field of organizational
psychology, business, HR management and management (Wollard & Shuck, 2011). The
conception of job engagement is considered as the attachment of managerial members’
behavior towards their job responsibility; in work attachment people utilize and articulate their
character, emotions and physical behaviors in the time of role performance. While in
disengagement employs protect their character, emotions and physical behaviors in the time of
role performance and extract themselves from the situation. Three psychological situations are
mentioned essential for engagement of employs which are psychological security, emotional
meaningfulness and psychosomatic accessibility (Kahn, 1990).

The effects of these three psychosomatic conditions on work engagement are inspected by May
et al. (2004). The outcome of his working shows that psychological conditions reveal
considerable optimistic relationships with work engagement. There is no experimental
assessment of khan’s work presented according to date and various situations. May et al.
(2004) provided only experimental assessment of khan’s model. Burnout literature provided an
imperative involvement in the progression of workers engagement during job, explaining
workers engagement as an optimistic case of burnout (Maslach et al., 2001). He also mentioned
that workers attachment is described by effectiveness, power and participation which is
opposed extent of those three burnouts which are incompetence, tiredness and pessimism.

Work engagement can be evaluated by the reverse model of scores on the Maslach Burnout
Inventory–General examination (MBI–GS) magnitude as burnout is a deteriorated form of work
engagement (Maslach and Leiter 1997).by explaining work engagement and burnout as
opposite posts of different ranges which are completely enclosed by the MBI. Work
engagement and burnout are not two opposite ranges but are unhelpfully connected self-
determining situations of mind (Schaufeli and Bakker, 2004).they also stated that effective
measurement of work engagement is not possible by the opposite outline of MBI scores as they
are not equally selected and ideal states. Work engagement is positive state of mind satisfying
the requirements of job and is described by incorporation energy and devotion. Incorporation is
described by workers full focus and being happily immersed in his job, and time go by quickly
and worker finds complexities in flaking himself from work. Energy is described as high level of
vigor and intellectual flexibility while doing job, having determination while facing difficulties
and devoting exertions willingly. And devotion is having a sagacity of challenge, satisfaction,
motivation, eagerness and significance. This is the definition acquired from current study. The
essential attributes to the conception of work engagement are vigor (energy), eagerness
(devotion) and participation (incorporation) which are captured through this approach.
According to this approach work engagement is an independent construct having no relation
with burnout. The description of work engagement is mostly referenced by Schaufeli and
Bakker (2004) and Kahn (1990). Both writers have same point of view on the demonstration of
work engagement: physical energy, cognitive incorporation and emotional devotion (Welch,
2011). One main obsession in literature of engagement which lie on the top is relationship
between employee engagement and other constructs like job association managerial
citizenship activities and executive dedication. A lot of theories and research consider
engagement as a unique element in work progress. But review of current literatures implies
that there is need to explore that composite procedure of engaging the employee on a
workplace (Geeth & Sebastian, 2014).

2.2 Perceived career support

Employees’ opinion towards their organization like how much their organization cares about
their career needs and aspects of perceived managerial support is known to be Perceived
career support (Kraimer& Wayne, 2004).The main focus of this study is based on workers
perception towards careers support for the reason that it determines their reaction after
experiencing perception of job instead of ideal characteristics of the work (Hackman & Lawler,
1971). Career support will have modest straight consequence on the attitude and activities of
workers if no career support is professed by workers. JD-R model of work engagement shows
that resources like social support of supervisors and coworkers generates a motivational
progression which magnifies work engagement which in turns gives better performance
outcomes moreover encouraging environment like giving value to the employs, motivation to
work together would result in high performance outcomes (Kraimer, Seibert, Wayne, Liden,
&Bravo,2011). Supervision support and social support like perceived managerial support are
prognostics of work engagement shown by many researches (e.g., Rich et al.,2010). Perceived
managerial support is considered completely related to work engagement in recent history of
job engagement researches (Rich et al.,2010). It is also confirmed that supportive environment
like giving worth to the employs and inspiration to work together is helpful in the engagment of
employes (e.g., Crawford et al., 2010; Nahrgang et al., 2011). Those organizations where
employs believes that their career needs and development are fulfilled and being cared by the
organization are seen more job engaged then those where workers fill unsecure about their
needs. the reason behind this is by this support of organization workers believes that they are
valued and cared by the association. When they believe so, workers will feel safe, allowing
them to focus fully on their responsibilities, entrust their time and vigor to performing their job
and move toward their work with passion. In sum, perceived career support is important for
experiencing energy, devotion, and incorporation which is basically work engagement (e.g., van
der Heijden et al., 2009). Executive profession administration practices to foresee career
growth (e.g., De Vos, Dewettinck, &Buyens, 2009). And managerial support for progress to
foresee job presentation when perceived career opportunity within the association was
elevated (e.g., Kraimeret al.,2011).

2.3 Psychological empowerment

Conger and Kanungo (1988) defined the term empowerment as “a process of enhancing
feelings of self-efficacy among organizational members through the identification of conditions
that foster powerlessness and through their removal by both formal organizational practices
and informal techniques of providing efficacy information”. Geeth and Sebastian (2014)
elaborated that employee empowerment is known as a necessary element, which contributes
in the success of an organization. Conger and Kanungo (1988) put the motivational dimension
to empowerment. At the later stage in 1990, Thomas and Velthouse discussed that
empowerment is motivation to complete task with the composition of four dimensions:
competence, impact, meaning and self-determination. By taking the same concept, spreitzer
(1995), depicted that psychological empowerment is a construction of a motivation to do a
work and that motivation is composition of impact, meaning, self-determination and
competence. The environment of an organization affects these dimensions of empowerment
(Thomas and Velthouse, 1990). Empowering the employees including job security, growth
chances and rewards lead to their satisfaction, which ultimately has positive influence on the
outcome of the organization (Lau & May, 1988). Past studies and scholars have depicted that
security for job and rewards to the employees on their best deeds bring the psychological
empowerment (Bordin et al., 2007; Spreitzer, 1995). It is very necessary to empower the
employees for their quick response in positive direction due to environmental changes (Geetha
& Sebastian, 2014). Researchers have not only discussed but also have found in their studies
that the empowering the employees brings the job enrichment (Geeth & Sebastian, 2014;
Niehoff et al., 2001) and job enrichment is a that factor, which brings the motivation in
employees, job satisfaction, performance and it also help in decreasing turnover intention as
well as to low the absenteeism (Geeth & Sebastian, 2014). The psychological empowerment has
positive impact on commitment as well as on employee engagement (Albrecht & Andreeetta,
2011). Geeth and Sebatian, (2014), depicted that the employee engagement can be increased
by empowering the employees psychologically.

2.4 Affective commitment and its Mediating role

There are three forms of the commitments, which are affective commitment, normative and
continuance commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991). The affective commitment is a psychological
identification of an employee, which contains their emotional involvement and attachment
with the organization (Allen & Meyer, 1996). In this study, the affective commitment has been
taken into account rather than other commitments, which are normative commitment
(obligation) and continuance commitment (feelings of pressure). However, affective
commitment contains the intrinsic motivations, so it has more positive behaviors and attitudes
as compare to other two forms of commitments (Grant, Dutton, &Rosso, 2008). Researchers
have found more correlation of affective commitment with work performance rather than
other commitments (see Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, &Topolnytsky, 2002 for a meta-analytic
review). Meyer and Matlin (2010) found that all forms of the commitments (Normative,
continuance and affective) have relationship with employees wellbeing. The psychological
empowerment has positive impact on commitment as well as on employee engagement
(Albrecht & Andreeetta, 2011), this discussion is showing that one side psychological
empowerment is positive association with commitment and other side it also has positive
impact on employee engagement. Therefore, the affective commitment is playing a mediating
role between the relationship of psychological empowerment and employee engagement.
Bakker and Schaufeli (2008) argued that perceived support career fetch intrinsic feelings
(Affective commitment) in employees, which further brings employee engagement. Therefore,
it can be predicted that affective commitment has also mediating role between the relationship
of perceived support career and employee engagement. June (2013) discussed that there are
several reason due to which the mediating role of affective commitment may be expected,
theoretically and empirically, between the relationship of perceived support career and
employee engagement.

2.5 Construction of Hypothesis

H1: Perceived career support has positive association with work engagement.

H2: Psychological empowerment has positive association with work engagement.

H3: Affective commitment has positive association with work engagement.

H4: Affective commitment has mediating role between the association of Perceived career
support and work engagement.

H5: Affective commitment has mediating role between the association of Psychological
empowerment and work engagement.
 2.6 Theoretical Model

The data will be collected by using questionnaires adopted from previous studies as referred
below;

S.No Variables Items Source

1 Employee’s Engagement 12 Avery, Derek R., David C. Wilson, and Patrick
F. McKay (2007)
2 Affective commitment 8 Masterson, Suzanne S. (2001)
3 Perceived support career 6 Kraimer, Maria, Scott Seibert, and Sandy
(Organizational support for Wayne (2011)
development)
4 Psychological empowerment 10 Zhang , Xiaomeng , and Kathryn M. Bartol
(2010)
 Chapter No. 3

Methodology
3.1 Population

The primary data will be gathered from the employees working in the firms of telecom
industries of Pakistan. Therefore, all firms from telecom industries of Pakistan are the
population of this study.

3.2 Sampling frame, sampling technique and sample size

The sampling frame of the study is a big city of Pakistan i.e. Lahore as the employees of the
telecom firms situated in this city will be taken into account. Furthermore, at least 300
employees will be taken into account. Thus, sample sizes of the study will 300. Furthermore,
the convenience sampling will use in this study.

3.3 Source of data

The data will be collected by using questionnaires adopted from previous studies as referred
and 5-point likert scale (1 for strongly agree to 5 for strongly disagree) will be used in these
questionnaires for the purpose of data collection.

3.4 Analysis techniques

The following analytical techniques will be used for analysis purpose.

3.4.1 Descriptive Statistics

In descriptive statistics the mean, standard deviation, minimum and maximum values,
Skewness and kurtosis of the series of the average values of the responses of the employees of
each variable.

3.4.2 Analytical Statistics

3.4.2.1 Correlation Analysis

To investigate the relationship between the variables the correlation analysis will carried out.

3.4.2.2 Regression Analysis

To check the influence of independent variables on dependent variables and mediating effect
of the mediator in relationship between independent and dependent variables, the regression
analysis will be carried out. However, before applying regression analysis the reliability of each
variable will be confirmed that it is at acceptable level (Nunnally, 1978).

References:
 Albrecht, S.L., &Andreetta, M. (2011). The influence of empowering leadership,
empowerment and engagement on affective commitment and turnover intentions in
community health service workers: Test of a model. Leadership in Health Services,24(3),
228–237.
 Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1996). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment
to the organization: An examination of construct validity. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 49, 252– 276.
 Avery, Derek R., David C. Wilson, and Patrick F. McKay (2007), "Engaging the Aging Workforce:
The Relationship Between Perceived Age Similarity, Satisfaction With Coworkers, and Employee
Engagement", Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1542-1556.
 Avolio, B.J., Zhu, W., Koh, W., & Bhatia, P. (2004). Transformational leadership and
organisational commitment: Mediating role of psychological empowerment and
moderating role structural distance. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 25(8), 951–
968.
 Bakker, A.B., &Demerouti, E. (2008). Towards a model of work engagement. Career
Development International, 13(3), 209–223.
 Blomme, R.J., Kodden, B., & Beasley-Suffolk, A. (2015), “Leadership theories and the
concept of work engagement: Creating a conceptual framework for management
implications and research”, Journal of Management & Organization, 21, 125-144.
 Bhatnagar, J. (2005). The power of psychological empowerment as an antecedent to
organizational commitment in Indian managers. Human Resource Development
International, 8(4), 419–433.
 Bordin, C., Bartram, T., &Casimir, G. (2006). The antecedents and consequences of
psychological empowerment among Singaporean IT employees. Management Research
News,30(1), 34–46.
 Conger, J., &Kanungo, R. (1988). The empowerment process: Integrating theory and
practice. Academy of Management Review,13(3), 471–482.
 Crawford, E. R., LePine, J. A., & Rich, B. L. (2010), Linking job demands and resources to
employee engagement and burnout: A theoretical extension and meta-analytic test.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 834– 848.
 De Vos, A., Dewettinck, K., &Buyens, D. (2009). The professional career on the right
track: A study on the interaction between career self-management and organizational
 career management in explaining employee outcomes. European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology, 18, 55 – 80.
 Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behavior.New York, NY: Plenum.
 Fairlie, P. (2011). Meaningful work, employee engagement, and other key employee
outcomes: Implications for human resource development. Advances in Developing
Human Resources,13(4), 504–521.
 Geetha J., Sebastian R. M. (2014), “Psychological Empowerment as a Predictor of
Employee Engagement: An Empirical Attestation”, Global Business Review 15(1) 93–
104.
 Gist, M.E. (1987). Self-efficacy: Implications for organizational behavior and human
resource management. Academy of Management Review, 12(3), 472–485.
 Grant, A. M., Dutton, J. E., &Rosso, B. D. (2008). Giving commitment: Employee support
programs and the prosocial sense making process. Academy of Management Journal,
51, 898– 918.
 Gujarati, D.N. (2008). Basic econometrics, 4th edition. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill.
 Hackman, J. R., & Lawler, E. E. III (1971). Employee reactions to job characteristics.
Journal of Applied Psychology Monograph, 55, 259– 286.
 Hackman, J.R., & Oldham, G.R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
 June, M. L. P., (2013), “Relationships among perceived career support, affective
commitment, and work engagement”, International Journal of Psychology, Vol. 48, No.
6, 1148–1155.
 Kahn, W.A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and
disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal,33(4), 692–724.
 Kraimer, M. L., & Wayne, S. J. (2004). An examination of perceived organizational
support as a multidimensional construct in the context of an expatriate assignment.
Journal of Management, 30, 209– 237.
 Kraimer, M. L., Seibert, S. E., Wayne, S. J., Liden, R. C., & Bravo, J. (2011). Antecedents
and outcomes of organizational support for development: The critical role of career
opportunities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 485– 500.
 Kraimer, Maria, Scott Seibert, and Sandy Wayne (2011), "Antecedents and Outcomes of
Organizational Support for Development: The Critical Role of Career Opportunities", Journal of
Applied Psychology, 96.
 Lau, R., & May, B. (1998). A win-win paradigm for quality of work life and business
performance. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 9(3), 211–226.
 Liden, R.C., Wayne, S.J., &Sparrowe, R.T. (2000). An examination of the mediating role
of psychological empowerment on the relations between the job, interpersonal
relationships, and work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(3), 407–416.
 Maslach, C., &Leiter, M.P. (1997). The truth about burnout: How organizations cause
personal stress and what to do about it. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
 Maslach, C., Schaufelli, W.B., &Leiter, M.P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of
Psychology,52(1), 397–422.
 Masterson, Suzanne S. (2001), "A Trickle-Down Model of Organizational Justice: Relating
Employees' and Customers' Perceptions of and Reactions to Fairness", Journal of Applied
Psychology, 86, 594-604.
 Mauno, S., Kinnunen, U., Ma¨kikangas, A., &Feldt, T. (2010). Job demands and
resources as antecedents of work engagement: A qualitative review and directions for
future research. In S.L. Albrecht (Ed.), Handbook of Employee Engagement:
Perspectives, Issues, Research and Practice.Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishers, pp.
111–128.
 May, D.R., Gilson, R.L., & Harter, L.M. (2004). The psychological conditions of
meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at
work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,77(1), 11–37.
 Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of
organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61 – 89.
 Meyer, J. P., & Maltin, E. R. (2010). Employee commitment and well-being: A critical
review, theoretical framework and research agenda. Journal of Vocational Behavior,77,
323– 337.
 Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., &Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective,
continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of
antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 20 – 52.
 Meyerson, S.L., & Kline, T.J.B. (2008). Psychological and environmental empowerment:
Antecedents and consequences. Leadership & Organization Development Journal,29(5),
444–460.
 Mohapatra, M., & Sharma, B.R. (2010). Study of employee engagement and its
predictors in an Indian public sector undertaking. Global Business Review,11(2), 281–
301.
 Nahrgang, J. D., Morgeson, F. P., & Hofmann, D. A. (2011). Safety at work: A meta-
analytic investigation of the link between job demands, job resources, burnout,
engagement, and safety outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 71 – 94.
 Niehoff, B.P., Moorman, R.H., Blakely, G., & Fuller, J. (2001). The influence of
empowerment and job enrichment on employee loyalty in a downsizing environment.
Group & Organization Management, 26(1), 93–113.
 Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric Theory, 2nd edition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
 Rich, B. L., LePine, J. A., & Crawford, E. R. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and
effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 617– 635.
 Ryan, R.M., & Frederick, C. (1997). On energy, personality and health: Subjective vitality
as a dynamic reflection of well being. Journal of Personality,65(3), 529–565.
 Saks, A.M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of
Managerial Psychology,21(7), 600–619.
 Salanova, M., Agut, S., &Peiro, J.M. (2005). Linking organizational resources and work
engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: Mediation of service
climate.Journal of Applied Psychology,90(6), 1217–1227.
 Schaufeli, W.B., & Bakker, A.B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their
relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of
Organizational Behavior,25(3), 293–315.
 Strom, D. L., Sears, K.L., & Kelly, K.M. (2014), “work engagement: The role of
organizational justice and leadership style in predicting engagement among
employees”, Journal of Leadership & Organizational studies, 21, 71-182.
 Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work
engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross national study. Educational and
Psychological Measurement,66(4), 701–716.
 Schaufeli, W.B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma, V., & Bakker, A.B. (2002). The
measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic
approach. Journal of Happiness Studies,3(1), 71–92.
 Seibert, S.E., Wang, G., &Courtright, S.H. (2011). Antecedents and consequences of
psychological and team empowerment in organizations: A meta- analytic review.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(5), 981–1003.
 Shuck, B., Reio, T.G., & Rocco, T.S. (2011). Employee engagement: An examination of
antecedent and outcome variables. Human Resource Development International,14(4),
427–445.
 Slatten, T., &Mehmetoglu, M. (2011). Antecedents and effects of engaged frontline
employees. Managing Service Quality, 21(1), 88–107.
 Spreitzer, G.M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions,
measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442–1465.
 Spreitzer, G.M., Kizilos, M.A., &Nason, S.W. (1997). A dimensional analysis of the
relationship between psychological empowerment, and effectiveness, satisfaction, and
strain. Journal of Management,23(5), 670–704.
 Stander, M.W., &Rothmann, S. (2010). Psychological empowerment, job insecurity and
employee engagement. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology,36(1), 1–8.
 Thomas, K.W., &Velthouse, B.A. (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: An
interpretive model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review,15(4),
666–681.
 Van der Heijden, J. A. V., van Engen, M. L., &Paauwe, J. (2009). Expatriate career
support: Predicting expatriate turnover and performance. International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 20, 831– 845.
 Welch, M. (2011). The evolution of the employee engagement concept: Communication
implications. Corporate Communications: An International Journal,16(4), 328–346.
 Wollard, K.K., & Shuck, B. (2011). Antecedents to employee engagement: A structured
review of the literature. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 13(4), 429–446.
 Yang, S., & Lee, K. (2009). Linking empowerment and job enrichment to turnover
intention: The influence of job satisfaction.International Review of Public
Administration, 14(2), 13–23.
 Zhang, Xiaomeng , and Kathryn M. Bartol (2010), "linking empowering leadership and employee
creativity: the influence of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative
process engagement", Academy of Management Journal, 53, 107-128.
 Geetha, J., Sebastian, R. M., 2014, “Psychological Empowerment as a Predictor of
Employee Engagement: An Empirical Attestation”, Global Business Review, 15(1) 93–
104.
 Suk, B.C., Thi Bich, H. T., Byung I. P. (2015). “Inclusive leadership and work engagement:
Mediating roles of Affective organizational commitment and creativity”, Social Behavior
and Personality, 43(6), 931-944.
 Questionnaire
Name (Optional):……………………….. Age:………………………………….. Gender: ……………………….

Occupation: ………………………………. Organization:……………………. Year of Experience:………

(1: Strongly Agree, 2: Agree, 3: Neither Agree nor Disagree, 4: Disagree, 5: Strongly Disagree)

Psychological empowerment

1. The work I do is very important to me. 1 2 3 4 5

2. My work activities are personally meaningful to me. 1 2 3 4 5

3. The work I do is meaningful to me. 1 2 3 4 5

4. I am confident about my ability to do my jobs. 1 2 3 4 5

5. I am self-assured about my capabilities to perform my work activities. 1 2 3 4 5

6. I have mastered the skills necessary for my job. 1 2 3 4 5

7. I have significant autonomy in determining how I do my job. 1 2 3 4 5

8. I can decide on my own how to go about doing my work. 1 2 3 4 5

9. I have considerable opportunity for independence and freedom in how I do my
job. 1 2 3 4 5

10. My impact on what happens in my department is large. 1 2 3 4 5

11. I have a great deal of control over what happens in my department. I have
significant influence over what happens in my department. 1 2 3 4 5

Employee engagement
1. I know what is expected of me. 1 2 3 4 5

2. I have the materials and equipment I need to do my work right. 1 2 3 4 5

3. At work, I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day. 1 2 3 4 5

4. In the last seven days, I have received recognition or praise for doing good work. 1 2 3 4 5

5. My supervisor, or someone at work, seems to care about me as a person. 1 2 3 4 5

6. There is someone at work who encourages my development. 1 2 3 4 5

7. At work, my opinions seem to count. 1 2 3 4 5

8. The mission or purpose of my company makes me feel my job is important. 1 2 3 4 5

9. My associates or fellow employees are committed to doing quality work. 1 2 3 4 5

10. I have a best friend at work. 1 2 3 4 5

11. In the last six months, someone at work has talked to me about my progress. 1 2 3 4 5

12. This last year, I have had opportunities at work to learn and grow. 1 2 3 4 5

Affective organizational commitment

1. I am extremely glad that I chose to work for this department/college over others I
was considering at the time I joined. 1 2 3 4 5

2. I am proud to tell others that I am part of this department/college. 1 2 3 4 5

3. I am willing to put in a great deal of effort beyond that normally expected in order
to help the department/college be successful. 1 2 3 4 5

4. For me, this is the best of all possible departments/colleges for which to work. 1 2 3 4 5

5. I find that my values and the department/college's values are very similar. 1 2 3 4 5

6. I talk up the department/college as a great place to work. 1 2 3 4 5

7. The department/college really inspires the very best in me in the way of job
performance. 1 2 3 4 5
8. I really care about the fate of the department/college. 1 2 3 4 5

Perceived career support (Organizational support for development)

1. My organization has programs and policies that help employees to advance in
their functional specialization. 1 2 3 4 5
2. My organization provides opportunities for employees to develop their specialized
functional skills. 1 2 3 4 5
3. My organization has programs and policies that help employees to reach higher
managerial levels. 1 2 3 4 5
4. My organization has career development programs that help employees develop
their specialized functional skills and expertise. 1 2 3 4 5
5. My organization provides opportunities for employees to develop their
managerial skills. 1 2 3 4 5
6. My organization has career development programs that help employees develop
their managerial skills. 1 2 3 4 5