WORK ENGAGEMENT: A CALLING OR CAREER?
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.
© 2017 AESS Publications. All Rights Reserved.
Keywords:Work engagement, Attributes, Call, Career.
ARTICLE HISTORY: Received: 10 August 2017, Revised: 21 September 2017 , Accepted: 29 September 2017, Published: 5 October 2017
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.
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
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 |
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.
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. |
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