Cargando…

Building work engagement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis investigating the effectiveness of work engagement interventions

Low work engagement may contribute towards decreased well‐being and work performance. Evaluating, boosting and sustaining work engagement are therefore of interest to many organisations. However, the evidence on which to base interventions has not yet been synthesised. A systematic review with meta‐...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Knight, Caroline, Patterson, Malcolm, Dawson, Jeremy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5516176/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28781428
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.2167
_version_ 1783251115350949888
author Knight, Caroline
Patterson, Malcolm
Dawson, Jeremy
author_facet Knight, Caroline
Patterson, Malcolm
Dawson, Jeremy
author_sort Knight, Caroline
collection PubMed
description Low work engagement may contribute towards decreased well‐being and work performance. Evaluating, boosting and sustaining work engagement are therefore of interest to many organisations. However, the evidence on which to base interventions has not yet been synthesised. A systematic review with meta‐analysis was conducted to assess the evidence for the effectiveness of work engagement interventions. A systematic literature search identified controlled workplace interventions employing a validated measure of work engagement. Most used the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES). Studies containing the relevant quantitative data underwent random‐effects meta‐analyses. Results were assessed for homogeneity, systematic sampling error, publication bias and quality. Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria and were categorised into four types of interventions: (i) personal resource building; (ii) job resource building; (iii) leadership training; and (iv) health promotion. The overall effect on work engagement was small, but positive, k = 14, Hedges g = 0.29, 95%‐CI = 0.12–0.46. Moderator analyses revealed a significant result for intervention style, with a medium to large effect for group interventions. Heterogeneity between the studies was high, and the success of implementation varied. More studies are needed, and researchers are encouraged to collaborate closely with organisations to design interventions appropriate to individual contexts and settings, and include evaluations of intervention implementation. © 2016 The Authors. Journal of Organizational Behavior published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5516176
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55161762017-08-02 Building work engagement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis investigating the effectiveness of work engagement interventions Knight, Caroline Patterson, Malcolm Dawson, Jeremy J Organ Behav Research Articles Low work engagement may contribute towards decreased well‐being and work performance. Evaluating, boosting and sustaining work engagement are therefore of interest to many organisations. However, the evidence on which to base interventions has not yet been synthesised. A systematic review with meta‐analysis was conducted to assess the evidence for the effectiveness of work engagement interventions. A systematic literature search identified controlled workplace interventions employing a validated measure of work engagement. Most used the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES). Studies containing the relevant quantitative data underwent random‐effects meta‐analyses. Results were assessed for homogeneity, systematic sampling error, publication bias and quality. Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria and were categorised into four types of interventions: (i) personal resource building; (ii) job resource building; (iii) leadership training; and (iv) health promotion. The overall effect on work engagement was small, but positive, k = 14, Hedges g = 0.29, 95%‐CI = 0.12–0.46. Moderator analyses revealed a significant result for intervention style, with a medium to large effect for group interventions. Heterogeneity between the studies was high, and the success of implementation varied. More studies are needed, and researchers are encouraged to collaborate closely with organisations to design interventions appropriate to individual contexts and settings, and include evaluations of intervention implementation. © 2016 The Authors. Journal of Organizational Behavior published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-12-13 2017-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5516176/ /pubmed/28781428 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.2167 Text en © 2016 The Authors. Journal of Organizational Behavior published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Knight, Caroline
Patterson, Malcolm
Dawson, Jeremy
Building work engagement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis investigating the effectiveness of work engagement interventions
title Building work engagement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis investigating the effectiveness of work engagement interventions
title_full Building work engagement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis investigating the effectiveness of work engagement interventions
title_fullStr Building work engagement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis investigating the effectiveness of work engagement interventions
title_full_unstemmed Building work engagement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis investigating the effectiveness of work engagement interventions
title_short Building work engagement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis investigating the effectiveness of work engagement interventions
title_sort building work engagement: a systematic review and meta‐analysis investigating the effectiveness of work engagement interventions
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5516176/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28781428
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.2167
work_keys_str_mv AT knightcaroline buildingworkengagementasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisinvestigatingtheeffectivenessofworkengagementinterventions
AT pattersonmalcolm buildingworkengagementasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisinvestigatingtheeffectivenessofworkengagementinterventions
AT dawsonjeremy buildingworkengagementasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisinvestigatingtheeffectivenessofworkengagementinterventions