3ytgeaf

Chapter 2: The Case for Employee Engagement – The Evidence
executives at Sears, Roebuck and Co., rebuilding the company around its customers.
The resulting service – profit chain model was based on then newly developed
measurement techniques and concluded that ‘there is a chain of cause and effect
running from employee behaviour to customer behaviour to profits.’ The Sears model
has been subsequently criticised; however, as one of the first serious attempts to
quantify and analyse the effects of employee engagement, it sparked much of the
subsequent debate.
6 As we set out in chapter 1, research into the extent to which reliable associations
can be found between levels of engagement and performance outcomes is
increasingly available.
7 However, it is important to bear in mind that this research covers a multitude of
sectors and follows different methodologies, so comparisons between studies
should be avoided unless care is taken to match the methodologies, particularly the
variables being measured. The studies vary in a number of ways. For example, there
are varying definitions of engagement; some focus on one element of engagement
(emotional, cognitive, behavioural); others focus on one or several but not all of the
drivers. Still other studies look at different performance outcomes (such as
retention, performance measures, profit, productivity, customer service); at the
contextual nature of engagement; and different levels, such as the group, or the
organisation.
8 Although the output from research houses and consultancies tends to be more
widely quoted, there is also an important series of studies by academics and
business schools looking at various aspects of engagement, in particular looking
inside what Professor John Purcell calls the ‘black box’, the impact of HR strategies
on performance. 49
9 We have not attempted to validate each and every study cited in this report .
Many can be challenged at some level. However, taken together, and supported by
the case studies of organisations who are using employee engagement to boost
performance, we suggest the overall picture becomes compelling.
10 As John Purcell told us. “Despite the difficulties and weaknesses it is hard to ignore
the volume of studies which show, to varying degrees, with varying sophistication,
a positive relationship between high performance/involvement work practices and
outcome measures.”
11 Some of these studies are outlined in chapter 1; for the sake of completeness we
include them here, in this more comprehensive list.
49
For example, Purcell, J., Kinnie, N., Hutchinson, S., Rayton, B and Swart, J. (2003) Understanding the People
and Performance Link: Unlocking the Black Box. London, CIPD or Kahn W A (1990) ‘Psychological conditions of
personal engagement and disengagement at work’, Academy of Management Journal; Macey W H, Schneider B
(2008) The meaning of employee engagement, Industrial and Organisational Psychology; Maslach C, Schaufeli
W B, Leiter M P (2001) ‘Job burnout’, Annual Review of Psychology; Saks A M (2006) ‘Antecedents and
consequences of employee engagement’, Journal of Managerial Psychology.
35