The for employees who bubble with dynamism, enthusiasm,

The contemporary world of work has witnesseddramatic changes over past decades whether that is because of technologicalinnovation, meeting the demands of increasingly diverse workforce or any othereconomic factor like globalization of business Burke and Cooper (2005); Cooperand Burke (2002). Ours is the age of cut-throat competition, to live on and tocompete successfully in today’s competitive and tumultuous economicenvironment, organizations require employees to be proactive, psychologicallyassociated in their work and fully engrossed in their roles. During the time ofeconomic difficulties, such as the recent global downturn, it becomespredominantly important for the organizations’ to have a workforce i.e.committed to organizational goals. Retaining a committed workforce can ensureemployers not only to retain their talent during uncertain times but also thatthose talented employees will be prepared to make the additional effort neededto ensure organizational survival (Scrima et al., 2014).

Organizational agility is constantly on thelookout for employees who bubble with dynamism, enthusiasm, energy, employeeswho believe in themselves and their abilities (Bakker and Schaufeli, (2008). Theinterest of the organizations’ have inclined more towards hiring employees whoare more innovative and creative and should also help them in a manner thatthey can improve the quality of production (Gemlik, Sisman and Sigri,(2010). Thisimplies that in order to achieve competitive edge organization need to haveengaged employees who are willing to put in that little bit extra for thebusiness. Also, engaged employees are thoughtful, unified, fully associated andconnected with in their work (Kahn, 1992)5 and they are emotionallycommitted to their organization for a longer period of time Buckingham , (1999)5; Wagner & Harter, (2006). Bleeker & Roodt,(2002)7; Schaufeli & Bakker, (2004)8 stated theimportance for managers of fostering the growth of work engagement asdisengagement or alienation is the dominant problem of workers’ lack ofcommitment.It is indicatedthat wok engagement is beneficial for the employees as well as for theorganization as it is considered to influence the employees on how they dotheir work to carry out their tasks Demerouti & Cropanzano, (2010). Also,positive consequences of work engagement at both individual level as well asorganizational level have been specified by several studies (Bakker etal 2007).

Employees’ personality traits can be regarded as an important variable toimpact their levels of work engagement Ozgur Ongore, (2014). Since individualsdo appear to respond in a different manner to their surroundings orenvironments, it is unclear as to why the role of personality traits has beenignored, to a great extent”. (Kahill, (1988); Zellar, 2000).

A study ondifferent variables of personality can help in answering many questions like,In what way do human beings are different? In what way and along whatdimensions do they differ?  Why and howmuch do they differ? How consistent are the human differences and can they bemeasured? And above all it helps in answering the questions that how thesepersonality traits can help in predicting work engagement. 1.   WorkEngagement: Engagement isan important concept to study and analyze because it is associated with thepositive individual and work related outcome as focused by Maslach et al., (2001). Engagement is defined as’spontaneous involvement in a role’ and ‘visible investment of attention andmuscular effort’ (Goffman, 1961).

Best services for writing your paper according to Trustpilot

Premium Partner
From $18.00 per page
4,8 / 5
4,80
Writers Experience
4,80
Delivery
4,90
Support
4,70
Price
Recommended Service
From $13.90 per page
4,6 / 5
4,70
Writers Experience
4,70
Delivery
4,60
Support
4,60
Price
From $20.00 per page
4,5 / 5
4,80
Writers Experience
4,50
Delivery
4,40
Support
4,10
Price
* All Partners were chosen among 50+ writing services by our Customer Satisfaction Team

Engaged employees quickly adapt to thechanges in their environment, and pass easily from one activity to the other ascompared to their counterparts Laangelaan et al.,(2006).  The origin of the term ’employeeengagement’ is not completely clear but Gallup organization was the first oneto use this term in the year 1990.

Both the terms employee engagement and workengagement are usually used interchangeably but the latter one is more explicitand specific. The employees’ relationship with his or her work is referred toas work engagement whereas employee engagement includes relationship of anemployee with his or her work as well as with the organization.Work engagementis by and large identified as the antipode of burnout and also the oppositeends of the continuum when talked about the relationship which the peopleestablished with their jobs. The term work engagement can also be stated withthe help of few the alternative expressions or words like dedication,commitment, passion, effort, focused, energetic, absorption, vigor andenthusiastic. (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2002). Kahn(1990, p. 692-724) described work engagement as the” harnessing of corporationmembers’ selves to their work roles”. It is defined as a “positive, fulfillingwork related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication andabsorption” Schaufeli, Salanova, Gonzalez-Roma &Bakker, 2002, p.

74.  2.1 Factorsaffecting Work engagement: Vigor and dedication are considered as the core dimensions of workengagement Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004) whereas absorption resembles ‘flow’i.e. a state of optimal experience.

1).Vigor: Any individual who experiences aliveness andenergy while working in any organization that effective aspect is referred toas vigor (Sonnentag and Niessen, 2008). Vigor pertains to high levels of vim,dynamism, zip and mental exuberance while actively engaged in work. Thisvariable of work engagement is referred to as an aspect which is dynamic forthe well-being of the employees and is characterized as an immanent feeling ofaliveness and vitality Peterson & Seligman,(2004); Ryan & Frederick, (1997).