In recent years, researchers and human resource practitioners have taken an interest in examining ways to enhance employees’ performance through engagement. The link between genuine engagement and outstanding work performance is evident, for engagement is characterized by an individual’s investment and proactive behavior in the workplace. It is crucial to identify the factors that predict engagement both on the individual and organizational levels. In their study “Is competition engaging? Examining the interactive effects of goal orientation and competitive work environment on engagement”, Jones, Davis, and Thomas investigated the said contributors’ impact on employees’ involvement.
Seeking to establish a correlation between the presence of the said factors and the level of engagement, the authors put forward some hypotheses. They assumed that learning and proving goal orientation, in which an individual finds gratification in finessing their skills and in demonstrating competence respectively, enhances engagement (Jones et al., 2017, p. 393). On the contrary, avoidant employees that approach tasks with apprehension are less engaged (Jones et al., 2017, p. 393). The authors speculated that a competitive work environment has the potential to balance out both learning proving goal orientation and engagement; however, the effect is likely to be prominent solely in highly competitive environments (Jones et al., 2017, p. 395). Thus, the study reasoned that the impact of competitiveness should be investigated in conjunction with individual predispositions.
As for the research design, the authors elaborated a survey comprised of three scales on engagement, competitive work environment, and goal orientation. The item count of each scale varied from 12 to 20; response options ranged from 1 for “strongly disagree” to 7 for “strongly agree” (Jones et al., 2017, p. 396). The number of participants was 440, all of them older than 21 and with work experience of two years or more (Jones et al., 2017, p. 396). The researchers took into account whether a participant had supervisory responsibilities and the length of time that they had been in the current position (Jones et al., 2017, p. 397). A possible study’s limitation was that a considerable share of the data drawn is subjective and perceptual.
In conclusion, the authors acknowledged the potential of competitive environments to be engaging; however, they attributed a more significant role to individual dispositions toward competition. As the results showed, the participants low in learning and proving orientations act less engaged, when put in a competitive work environment (Jones et al., 2017, p. 400). Their counterparts that prioritize learning skills and proving their competence show more engagement (Jones et al., 2017, p. 400). However, the connection to competitiveness is not explicit as their motivation may be extrinsic, i.e., may not depend on external factors such as competition in the workplace.
The study’s implications may be put to use by human resources practitioners as part of strategic management. Firstly, the study brings one to perceive engagement as a complex phenomenon that provides a company with a competitive advantage. The importance of engagement was emphasized in a 2015 survey by Albrecht et al., in which they concluded that HR practitioners need to prioritize engagement in policies and practices, e.g., internal environment assessment. The claim finds support in a 2014 study by Kuratko, Hornsby, and Covin, who introduced five specific dimensions that determine a work environment conducive to entrepreneurial behavior (39). Engagement is attained through rewards and reinforcements and contributes to achieving the organization’s strategic plan (Kuratko et al., 2013, p. 39). All in all, increasing and maintaining employees’ engagement is an indispensable part of strategic management.
The term engagement has strongly resonated with academics, business executives, and human resource practitioners throughout recent years. It became clear that for an employee, it takes more than merely fulfilling responsibilities to contribute to achieving goals set by the company. The question arose as to what characteristics a work environment needs to possess to be engaging. Jones et al. argued that individual predispositions determine the reaction to competitiveness and predict engagement. The individualism of working styles and attitudes calls for environmental assessment and wisely embedded engaging practices, which a viable business strategy should encompass.
References
Albrecht, S. L., Bakker, A. B., Gruman, J. A., Macey, W. H., & Saks, A. M. (2015). Employee engagement, human resource management practices and competitive advantage. An integrated approach. Journal of Organizational effectiveness, 2(1), 7‐35.
Jones, J. L., Davis, W. D., & Thomas, C. H. Is competition engaging? Examining the effects of goal orientation and competitive work environment on engagement. Human Resource Management, 56(3), 389–405.
Kuratko, D. F., Hornsby, J. S., & Covin, J. G. (2014). Diagnosing a firm’s internal environment for corporate entrepreneurship. Business Horizons, 57(1), 37-47.