WORK ENGAGEMENT: A CALLING OR CAREER?

Maria Dinna P. Avinante1 --- Ma. Flordeliza L.Anastacio2+ --- Margarita J. Mangalile3 --- Nilo V. Francisco4

1,2,3,4 College of Management and Technology, Centro Escolar University, Malolos, Bulacan, Philippines

ABSTRACT

The primary objective of this research was to examine the functional relationship of employee engagement of the present occupational choice as a career or calling. In accordance, the career or calling attributes and UWES work engagement were applied to a sample respondents of N=200 divided into two from different occupational groups and industry sectors. Results revealed a mean of 3.85 for calling and 2.68 for career while UWES with a mean of 5.81 and 5.77. The results proved that respondents with a calling or career are consistently insignificantly related to their level of work engagement with-0.10462 and -0.58674 (LOW CORRELATION). It is evident that while career and calling attributes may be present among respondents, it was not proven to have strong relationship to employee work engagement in their present occupations.

Keywords:Work engagement, Attributes, Call, Career.

ARTICLE HISTORY: Received: 10 August 2017, Revised: 21 September 2017 , Accepted: 29 September 2017, Published: 5 October 2017

1. INTRODUCTION

Management recognizes that human capital is the most important resource that makes a successful business.   There is a big question poses on this important resource and that is how can employees be engaged in  an environment with multi diverse workforce    coming from different cultures and with  different personalities?  An issue which researchers have been trying to resolve in many studies.  Engagement was emanated from  psychological  concepts   such as contagion or cross over and self determination theory. In a contagion,   according to Salanova “ people who  work in the same group may share similar beliefs  and affective experiences. They also  manifest same motivational and behavioural patterns.” (Salanova, 2005).  Also, a positive or negative transference of  experiences  will take place from one person to another (Bakker, 2011). Another  concept  is the   SDT or the self-determination theory, Meyer and Gagne (2008) which  states that   “ employees who are engaged experience greater  physical and psychological well being”.  Employees who have worked hard and committed to their jobs are usually promoted to higher positions and are getting regular  wage  increases. The   engagement shows  invested  time, effort, loyalty and dedication  to work  which  results to  a persistent,   positive affective-motivational state of fulfilment (Schaufeli and Bakker, 2004). In a  management perspective, low  employee turn over rate,   may result in  increase productivity and financial gains.  In effect,  engagement offers both economic and social  benefits  to employees and employers.

But what is work engagement? Numerous definitions have been formulated  by experts in understanding the term. According to Bakker,  it  is a “persistent, positive, affective-motivational state characterized by energy, dedication and absorption” (Schaufeli and Bakker, 2004).  While Kahn  referred  engagement as the  “workers’ positive attitude at their workplace”. A    “self-in-role” where workers are attentive, connected, integrated and focused in their work environment (Kahn, 1990).  Another  interesting research  which serves as the starting point in conducting this  paper is the study conducted by Dik et al which  says  that “ an individual who is dissatisfied with his or her career would want to experience  a calling or vocation rather that getting high wages.  Dik’s  mentioned  calling  which consists of three  dimensions are  “ (a). A transcendent summons, experienced as originating beyond the self . (b)  an approach a particular life role in a manner oriented toward demonstrating or deriving a sense of purpose or meaningfulness (c) and holds other oriented  values and goals as primary sources of motivation “ (Dik, 2009). The paper described the dimensions which  researchers of this study found them very useful in understanding calling and vocation relevant to engagement. With many literature and studies relating to  employee engagement, researchers of this study are into investigating the employee engagement using other concept that is more personal and conventional   which is calling and career.   The authors were inspired by  John Clark in his book “The Money is the Gravy”  which mentioned about  calling and career  and its significant roles in the success or failure of an individual and the  organization . The concept of calling and career have been  used   to  identify   engagement in an   occupational context. A calling is  described by John Clark  as  having the following attributes of bliss, internally driven, engaged, holistic  while career is angst, externally driven, enervated, compartmentalized and busy (John, 2003). Whether a calling or career, employees   manifest  engagement  which vary  across occupations  from different industries (Kular, 2008).  It is for this purpose that researchers wish to find   other drivers of engagement that will contribute to the understanding of engagement in different context. The hypothesis is to prove that there is a significant relationship of calling and career to employee work engagement.

2. METHOD

2.1. Participants

Participants were a total of n= 200 accross  Bulacan, Philippines.  On examining the data drawn from purposive sampling, all of the participants were working and came from different occupational groups and industry sectors. Others are overseas worker who also   participated in the survey.  There were   94 male or 47% and 106 or 53% were female for a total of 100%. Employees length of stay in a company were  identified ranging from, 1 to 5 years, 6-10, 11-to 15 and 16 yrs above.

Table-1. Profile of Respondents

Industry Type Occupation (N=Years)  
1-5 yrs 6-10yrs 11-15 yrs 16 yrs above 21 yrs above TOTAL
Manufacturing Producn Supv
9
12
13
7
5
46
Banking/Finance Cashiers/
4
8
12
13
3
40
Sales/Marketing Sales Specialist
5
10
9
8
6
38
Academe Teachers/Admin
6
8
7
5
5
31
Tourism/Hospitality Acct Executives
2
14
6
1
2
25
Health/Medical Doctors/Chief Nurse
1
2
3
1
3
11
Others
1
2
0
1
4
    
9
TOTAL
28
56
51
36
28
 
200

Survey conducted with respondents coming from different industries 

2.2. Procedure

The tools used were an existing instrument adapted and modified to further suit the objectives of this study. The questionnaire is made up of 3 parts. The first part was to gather  the profile of the respondents in terms of age, sex, civil status, occupations and length of service. The second part was the calling and career attributes by John Clark using a 5point likert scale, Third is the UWES instrument or the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale that is widely used in measuring engagement.  The test was administered to n=200. Researchers used descriptive correlation to identify the significant relationship between calling  and  career and   work  engagement in different occupations. Also researchers conducted interviews to validate the responses.

LEGEND FOR INTERPRETATIONS
SCALE
1.00-1.50 Never or Almost Never
1.51-2.50 Occasionally
2.51-3.50 Applies to me about as often as not
3.51-4.50 Usually
4.51-5.00 Always or Almost Always

 

 

 

 

 

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Results revealed the responses of the first group consists of 80 respondents while 120 respondents  were the second group who  chose the career.  The Calling attributes are assigned with letter A  and  a corresponding number. A1 (Bliss) A2 (Internally Driven) A3 (Holistic) A4 (Integrated) A5 (Growing) A6 (Renewing) A7 (Engaged)  A8 (Energized) A9 (Vital) A10 (Life-Affirming) A11 (Difficult).

John Clark identified the following attributes with its description. The following were  rated  by the respondents using the 5pt likert scale.    Bliss which means having  complete happiness. Internally Driven as having a response to a call from within. Holistic which engages your person, body and soul. Integrated which means your work is an expression of your essential self. Growing as calling which takes you inevitably on a journey of self discovery. Renewing means you are a different person tomorrow from today. Engaged which means heavy workload that revitalizes you. Energized as living a life that is in tune with your nature. Vital as a way out of your reach if you are imprisoned in a career. Life affirming is having the self that you truly are and Difficult which means difficult to find and follow your calling (John, 2003). The mean scores received by each attribute were shown on table 2.

Table-2. Mean Scores of Calling

A1
3.74
Usually
A2
4.33
Usually
A3
4.35
Usually
A4
4.33
Usuall
A5
4.21
Usually
A6
3.95
Usually
A7
4.21
Usually
A8
2.48
Applies to me  as often as not
A9
3.85
Usually
A10
2.20
Applies to me  as often as not
A11
2.88
Applies to me  as often as not
Over all mean
3.68
Usually

Source: Computed mean results from Group1 (80 respondents)

Most of the answers fall under usually and only attributes A8, A10, A11 or Energized, Life affirming and Difficult received low mean scores. But, overall mean for calling is 3.68 with verbal interpretation of usually.  It means that respondents recognized the attributes under calling, they experiencinced bliss in their work, internally driven,  growing , though with a little difficulty in finding the real calling in their work. 

While the Career and its attributes were given an assigned letter and  corresponding number such as B1, B2 up to B11.  On the attributes of Career  which were chosen by 120 respondents, consists of the following  attributes such as Angst (B1) as having a strong feeling of being worried or nervous. Externally driven (B2) is a desire for external satisfaction such as money approval and status. Fragmented (B3) is a feeling of incompleteness. Compartmentalized (B4) means activities to be accomplished were mere fragments of your being. Shrivelling (B5) is being helpless or becoming inefficient. Recycling (B6) is an experience in the job is five times over. Promotions and job changes provide some new experiences. Busy (B7) means you are under pressure of the time given. Enervated (B8) is lacking physical, mental or moral vigor. Stale (B9) means boring or unoriginal. Life Denying  (B10) is denying the  things that are potentially the nobles aspects of your being. Last on the Career attribute  is Easy (B11) . The results of mean scores per attribute were shown on table 3.

Table-3. Mean Scores of Career

  MEAN INTERPRETATION
Total Respondents (120)    
B1
2.88
Applies to me  as often as not
B2
2.96
Applies to me  as often as not
B3
2.76
Applies to me  as often as not
B4
3.05
Applies to me as often as not
B5
2.50
Occasionally
B6
3.05
Applies to me  as often as not
B7
2.92
Applies to me  as often as not
B8
2.82
Applies to me  as often as not
B9
2.63
Applies to me  as often as not
B10
2.83
Applies to me  as often as not
B11
2.93
Applies to me  as often as not
Overall Mean
2.85
Applies to me  as often as not

Source: Computed mean results fom Group 2 (120 respondents)

Results  revealed that career attributes received almost the same verbal interpretation of applies to me about as often as not and only one attribute which is  B5 or the shrivelling attribute received the  occasionally interpretation. This only proves that majority of the respondents    have shown only the desire for money in their work. The feeling of worry or nervousness  is present due to non stability of work that the tendency is to change their jobs   from one to another. Respondents also  manifest boredom and lack of physical and mental vigor in their jobs which lead to restlessness and non fulfilment of duties.   

For the UWES  instrument,  using a 5pt likert scale   revealed the  following mean scores  of  an overall of 3.44 as very important for Calling and UWES. While Career and UWES  received an overall mean score of 3.77 . This means that both groups, calling and career  have shown  their regard  to work  engagement in their  occupational choice.

The results showed an overall mean of 3.44 which received a verbal interpretation of applies to me as often as not  for the calling group which revealed vigour, dedication and absorption to their present work, however, there are responses which are usually and occasionally  for items in the UWES such as Q 1-4 and Q 8-12 which referred to energy at work, meaning and purpose. While Q8- 12 pertains to how happy they are at work,  proud and immersed.

Table-4. Calling vs. UWES

UWES
Mean
Verbal Interpretation
1
3.90
Usually
2
3.61
Usually
3
3.59
Usually
4
3.11
Usually
5
3.21
Applies to me  as often as not
6
3.88
Usually
7
3.39
Applies to me  as often as not
8
3.96
Usually
9
3.70
Usually
10
3.71
Usually
11
3.90
Usually
12
3.91
Usually
13
2.50
Occasionally
14
3.17
Applies to me  as often as not
15
3.50
Applies to me  as often as not
16
3.00
Applies to me  as often as not
17
2.45
Occasionally
Overall mean
3.44
Applies to me as often as not

Source: Computed UWES mean results from Group1

Table-5. Career vs. UWES

UWES
Mean
Verbal Interpretation
1
3.89
Usually
2
3.73
Usually
3
3.75
Usually
4
3.69
Usually
5
3.01
Applies to me  as often as not
6
3.85
Usually
7
3.89
Usually
8
3.78
Usually
9
3.65
Usually
10
3.70
Usually
11
3.21
Applies to me  as often as not
12
3.00
Applies to me  as often as not
13
2.75
Applies to me  as often as not
14
2.45
Occasionally
15
3.00
Applies to me  as often as not
16
3.50
Applies to me  as often as not
17
2.50
Occasionally
Over all mean
3.37
Applies to me  as often as not

Source: Computed UWES mean resuts from Group 2

Similar to Table 4, Table 5 also receive  the same verbal interpretation of applies to me as often as not. With usually and occasionally responses on items such as energy, meaning and purpose. Responses were taken from items referring to how happy the respondents  are at work, fulfilled , challenged and persevered when work does not go well. Generally, the responses of the groups are nearly the same.  The  17 statements were rated  as to how respondents feel at work  in terms of  vigour,  dedication and absorption.

The results revealed   an overall mean scores  of 3.44 and 3.37 which means applies as often as not for the 2 groups which means that the two groups of respondents regard their work and have shown their vigour, dedication and absorption despite  they are  calling or career group. Work is regarded as very important as it is a  reflection of their status in life, source of everyday living and just an enjoyable  experience.

Table 6 presents  the  computed values using Pearson correlation  with the following 0.617 for UWES –Calling  and  0.222564 for UWES- Career. While  the breakdown results for the two groups were -0.10462 and -0.58674 correlation.

Table-7. Correlation of UWES Calling and Career

80 UWES /CALLING -0.104662     NEGLIGIBLE
120 UWES/CAREER -0.58674       MODERATE

Source: Computed values of UWES/career/calling

The  UWES VS CALLING  with   N=80   has a value of -0.104662 which means  Neglible or  no Significant correlation. Whereas  the UWES VS.CARREER with  N=120  has  a value of -0.58674  and suggest a moderate correlation. It only proves that the higher the UWES Level, the lower the career because it is shows an inverse correlation.

4. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1.The N respondents  consists of  47% male and 53% female.  The respondents were divided into 2 groups. First is the calling group with a total of 80 respondents and career group which  consist of 120 respondents. They came    from different  industry types and occupational groups . The length  of service of  the respondents  were  from  1 year up to 21 years.

2. The calling group consists of  11 attributes such as  bliss, internally driven, holistic, integrated, growing, renewing, engaged, energized, vital, life affirming and difficult. While the Career is angst, externally driven, fragmented, compartmentalized, shrivelling, recycling, busy, enervated, stale, life denying and easy. Results revealed that out of 200 respondents, 80 of them chose the Calling attributes and 120 of the respondents chose the Career attributes. Calling and  Career were rated using the 5 point Likert Scale. The overall mean score of Calling is  3.68 with an interpretation of Usually while Career received only an overall mean score of 2.85 which means  applies to me about as often as not.

3.The Utrecht  Work Engagement Scale  (UWES) was used  to measure how the employees  feel about their jobs with  vigour, absorption and dedication as indicators.  It consist of 17 questions and rated using the 5 point Likert Scale. The calling group received an overall   mean scores of 3.44 and career with 3.37 with an interpretation of applies to me about as often as not.

4. The correlation results  shows the following values of -0.10462 for UWES vs. Calling and -0.58674 for UWES vs. Career. The  UWES vs CALLING  with   N=80   has a value of -0.104662 means  Neglible or  no Significant correlation. Whereas  the UWES vs CARREER is with  N=120  received  a value of -0.58674  and suggest a moderate correlation. It only proves that the higher the UWES Level, the lower the career because it is shows an inverse correlation.

5. Findings indicated that Work Engagement is very important between the two groups  of respondents however, the  attributes for calling and career may be present  but not necessarily mean  engagement in their work. Further investigation should be conducted employing a bigger population  together with their companies and to encourage other researchers to develop strategies to improve  work engagement in the local setting.

Funding: This study received no specific financial support.
Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Contributors/Acknowledgement: The authors would like to Thanks John Clark and UWES for the free use of the material.

REFERENCES

Bakker, A.B., 2011. An evidence-based model of work engagement. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(4): 265-269. View at Google Scholar | View at Publisher

Dik, 2009. Calling and vocation in career counselling: Recommendations for promoting meaningful work. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40(6): 625-632. View at Google Scholar | View at Publisher

John, C., 2003. The money is the gravy. Park Ave, NY: Warner Books, Inc. Hachette Book Group, 237.

Kahn, W., 1990. Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4): 692-724.View at Google Scholar | View at Publisher

Kular, 2008. Employee engagement: A literature review. Kingston Business School.

Meyer and Gagne, 2008. Employee engagement from a self determination theory perspective. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1(1): 60-62. View at Google Scholar | View at Publisher

Salanova, M., 2005. Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: The mediation of service climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6): 1217-1227. View at Google Scholar | View at Publisher

Schaufeli, W. and A. Bakker, 2004. Job demands, job resources and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3): 293-315.View at Google Scholar | View at Publisher