Page 15 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 15 of 97 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
9
Evolution of Employee Engagement
Similar to CSR, there is no universally accepted definition of employee
engagement. For the purpose of this study, the author combined one of three definitions
from Gallup Organization, Tower Perrin’s Global Workforce Study, and The Conference
Board.
Most of the literature on employee engagement comes from professional and
practical sources, such as researchers and consultants, instead of academics (Sridevi &
Markos, 2010). The concept of employee engagement appeares to have been first
mentioned by Khan (1990, as cited in Kula & Gatenby & Rees & Soane & Truss, 2008)
who regarded it as a stand-alone concept that differentiates from other employee role
constructs such as involvement, commitment or intrinsic motivation. He mentioned that
“engagement requires employees to be psychologically as well as physically present
when occupying and performing an organizational role (Khan, 1990 as cited in Kula et al.,
2008, Conceptualizing employee engagement, para.1).”
Since then, however, many different and conflicting definitions sprang up, and
those studies examined employee engagement under different protocols, which made the
state of knowledge of employee engagement rather difficult to determine (Kula et al.,
2008).
Despite this, it was argued that all those definitions seem similar to other well-known
and established constructs such as “organizational commitment” and
“organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB) (Robinson, 2004 as cited in Kula et al.,
2008).” But Robinson regarded employee engagement as “one step up from commitment.”
Object Description
| Title | The effects of corporate social responsibility one employee engagement |
| Author | Ma, Hongyue |
| Author email | hongyuem@usc.edu; hongyuem@gmail.com |
| Degree | Master of Arts |
| Document type | Thesis |
| Degree program | Strategic Public Relations |
| School | Annenberg School for Communication |
| Date defended/completed | 2011-04-01 |
| Date submitted | 2011 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2011-05-03 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Thorson, Kjerstin |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Floto, Jennifer Little, Sharoni |
| Abstract | Both corporate social responsibility (CSR) and employee engagement have become increasingly important to businesses today. The two are related: CSR affects a company’s employee engagement.; The purpose of this study is to explore those effects; the degree to which they take place and circumstances in which they occur; it also compared CSR’s influence to other well-recognized drivers of employee engagement to determine the significance of it.; This thesis will help corporations better understand the role of CSR when it relates to employee engagement, so they can design their CSR efforts accordingly and maximize the outcomes. |
| Keyword | corporate social responsibility (CSR); employee engagement; relationship between CSR and employee engagement; drivers of employee engagement; effects of CSR on employee engagement |
| Geographic subject (country) | USA; Germany |
| Coverage date | 1863/2009 |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m3879 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Ma, Hongyue |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Ma-4564 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume26/etd-Ma-4564.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 15 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 9 Evolution of Employee Engagement Similar to CSR, there is no universally accepted definition of employee engagement. For the purpose of this study, the author combined one of three definitions from Gallup Organization, Tower Perrin’s Global Workforce Study, and The Conference Board. Most of the literature on employee engagement comes from professional and practical sources, such as researchers and consultants, instead of academics (Sridevi & Markos, 2010). The concept of employee engagement appeares to have been first mentioned by Khan (1990, as cited in Kula & Gatenby & Rees & Soane & Truss, 2008) who regarded it as a stand-alone concept that differentiates from other employee role constructs such as involvement, commitment or intrinsic motivation. He mentioned that “engagement requires employees to be psychologically as well as physically present when occupying and performing an organizational role (Khan, 1990 as cited in Kula et al., 2008, Conceptualizing employee engagement, para.1).” Since then, however, many different and conflicting definitions sprang up, and those studies examined employee engagement under different protocols, which made the state of knowledge of employee engagement rather difficult to determine (Kula et al., 2008). Despite this, it was argued that all those definitions seem similar to other well-known and established constructs such as “organizational commitment” and “organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB) (Robinson, 2004 as cited in Kula et al., 2008).” But Robinson regarded employee engagement as “one step up from commitment.” |
