THE STUDY OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT AND ITS IMPACT …researchscripts.org/global/articles/IJHRM/h201601007.pdfTHE STUDY OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT AND ITS IMPACT ON ... Presenting Titan quartz

THE STUDY OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT AND ITS IMPACT ON

TITAN WATCH DIVISION

Dr. SUNIL KUMAR DHAL

Associate Professor, QT & IT, Sri Sri university, Cuttack, Odisha.

Abstract

The academic researchers or consultancy and research institutions are mostly about employees‘

emotions, feelings and psychological attitude about the work and the company. Engaged employees

commit to the companies‘ values, feel fulfilled and enthusiastic in their work, they are focused and

energized in their work. The researcher wants to find out the impact of employee engagement in the

corporate and specifically Titan Watch division. The research has been carried out through a well-

designed questionnaire and applied primary data collection techniques. The reliability and validity of

data and questionnaire has been checked through some statistical tools. Initially the researcher had

identified thirty attributes which has some impact on the employee engagement. The conclusion has

drawn through factor analysis that the eight parameters are having some impact on employee

engagement.

Keywords: factor analysis, reliability test, employee engagement, questionnaire

1. Introduction

Titan Company brought about a paradigm shift in the Indian watch market when it in introduced its

futuristic quartz technology, complemented by international styling. Titan Company is the fifth largest

integrated own brand watch manufacturer in the world. In addition to 'Titan' the watch brand, Titan

Company has also built 'Tanishq' the leading jewellery brand over the past few years. Both these

brands are among the most recognised and loved brands in India.

The success story began in 1984 with a joint venture between the Tata Group and the Tamil Nadu

Industrial Development Corporation. Presenting Titan quartz watches that sported an international

look, Titan Company transformed the Indian watch market. After Sonata, a value brand of

functionally styled watches at affordable prices, Titan Company reached out to the youth segment

with Fastrack, its third brand, trendy and chic. The company has sold 150 million watches world over

and manufactures over 15 million watches every year.

With a license for premium fashion watches of global brands, Titan Company repeated its pioneering

act and brought international brands into the Indian market. Tommy Hilfiger, FCUK, Timberland &

Police as well as the Swiss made watch – Xylys owe their presence in the Indian market to Titan

Company.

Entering the largely fragmented Indian jewellery market with no known brands in 1995,

Titan Company launched Tanishq, India's most trusted and fastest growing jewellery brand. Gold

Plus, the later addition, focuses on the preferences of semi-urban and rural India. Completing the

jewellery portfolio is Zoya, the latest retail chain in the luxury segment.

Titan Company has also made its foray into eyewear, offering a variety of differentiated products to

the end consumer consisting of frames, lenses, contact lenses and accessories. Frames are available in

both international brands (Levis, Esprit, Hugo Boss etc.) and in-house brands – Titan, Eye+ and Dash

which is an offering for children. The company has leveraged its manufacturing competencies and

INTERCONTINENTAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENTISSN:2350-0859 -ONLINE ISSN:2350-0840 -PRINT -IMPACT FACTOR:1.296VOLUME 3, ISSUE 1, JANUARY 2016

www.researchscripts.org 43 [email protected]

branched into precision engineering components & sub-assemblies, machine building & automation

solutions, tooling solutions and electronic sub-assemblies. With over 1100 retail stores across a carpet

area of over 1.5 million sq. ft. Titan Company has India‘s largest retail network spanning over 220

towns. The company has over 400 exclusive ‗World of Titan' showrooms and over 150 Fastrack

stores. It also has a large network of over 740 after-sales-service centres.

2.0 Literature review

Maslach and Leiter (1997) initially defined the engagement construct as the opposite of burnout (i.e.,

someone who is not experiencing job burnout must be engaged in their job.) Maslachet al (2001), six

areas of work-life lead to either burnout or engagement: workload, control, rewards and recognition,

community and social support, perceived fairness and values. Luthans and Peterson (2002)

elaborated on Kahn‘s work on employee engagement, which provides a convergent theory for

Gallup‘s empirically derived employee engagement. They opined that to be emotionally engaged is to

form meaningful connections with others and to experience empathy for them. In contrast, being

cognitively engaged refers to those who are acutely aware of their mission and role in their work

environment Dvir, Eden, Avolio, and Shamir (2002) defined active engagement in terms of „„high

levels of activity, initiative, and responsibility. Towers Perrin (2003), defines a definition of

engagement that involves both emotional and rational factors relating to work and the overall work

experience. The emotional factors tie to people‘s personal satisfaction and the sense of inspiration and

affirmation they get from their work and from being part of their organisation. Holbeche and

Springett (2003), people‘s perceptions of „meaning‟ with regard to the workplace are clearly linked

to their levels of engagement and, ultimately, their performance. They argue that employees actively

seek meaning through their work and, unless organisations try to provide a sense of meaning,

employees are likely to quit. They argue that high levels of engagement can only be achieved in

workplaces where there is a shared sense of destiny and purpose that connects people at an emotional

level and raises their personal aspirations May et al (2004), engagement is most closely associated

with the constructs of job involvement and flow (Csikszentmihalyi 1990). Job involvement is defined

as the degree to which the job situation is central to the person and his or her identity. Flow is the

holistic sensation that, people feel when they act with total involvement. Mount, Harter, Witt, and

Barrick (2004) defined engagement in terms of a ―high internal motivational state.‖ Wellins and

Concelman (2004) suggest that ―Employee engagement is the illusive force that motivates employees

to higher levels of performance. This coveted energy is an amalgam of ―commitment, loyalty,

productivity and ownership.‖ they further added that it includes, ―feelings and attitudes employees

have towards their jobs and their organization.‖

Robinson et al, Perryman and Hayday (2004), defines ―engagement as a positive attitude held by

the employee towards the organization and its values. An engaged employee is aware of the business

context, works with colleagues to improve performance within the job for the benefit of the

organization‖. They further add that organization must develop and nurture engagement which is a

two way relationship between employer and employee. The Corporate Executive Board (2004),

suggested that engagement is ―the extent to which employees commit to someone or something in

their organization, how and how long they stay as a result of that commitment.‖ The Gallup

Organisation (2004) found critical links between employee engagement, customer loyalty, business

growth and profitability. Gallup finds that higher workplace engagement predicts higher earnings per

share (EPS) among publicly-traded businesses. When compared with industry competitors at the

company level, organisations with more than four engaged employees for every one actively

disengaged, experienced 2.6 times more growth in EPS than did organisations with a ratio of slightly



less than one engaged worker for every one actively disengaged employee. The findings can be

considered as reliable as the variability in differing industries was controlled by comparing each

company to its competition, and the patterns across time for EPS were explored due to a ―bouncing‖

increase or decrease which is common in EPS (Ott 2007). Gallup‘s meta-analyses present strong

evidence that highly engaged workgroups within companies outperform groups with lower employee

engagement levels, and the recent findings reinforce these conclusions at the workgroup level. Lucey,

Bateman and Hines (2005) have deciphered that ―Employee Engagement is how each individual

connects with the company and the customers‖ Development Dimensions International Inc.(DDI)

(2005), head-quartered at Pittsburgh, define employee engagement as ―the extent to which people

enjoy and believe in what they do and feel valued for doing it.‖ There are three aspects of this

definition: enjoyment i.e. people enjoy what they do as a part of their job or otherwise in the

organisation; belief, that in doing so, they are making meaningful contributions to the organisation;

and value i.e. they is being recognized for making such efforts Truss et al (2006), define employee

engagement simply as „passion for work‟, a psychological state which is seen to encompass the three

dimensions of engagement discussed by Kahn (1990), and captures the common theme running

through all these definitions. He found that group in the public sector had a more negative experience

of work, they reported more bullying and harassment than those in the private sector, and were less

satisfied with the opportunities they had to use their abilities.

Saks (2006), a stronger theoretical rationale for explaining employee engagement can be found in

social exchange theory (SET). SET argues that obligations are generated through a series of

interactions between parties who are in a state of reciprocal interdependence. A basic principle of SET

is that relationships evolve over time into trusting, loyal, and mutual commitments as long as the

parties abide by certain „rules‟ of exchange (Cropanzano and Mitchell 2005). He argues that one way

for individuals to repay their organization is through their level of engagement. In other words,

employees will choose to engage themselves to varying degrees and in response to the resources they

receive from their organization. Macey and Schneider (2008) looked at engagement attitudinally and

behaviourally. They distinguished three broad conceptualizations of employee engagement, namely

state, trait, and behavioural engagement. Sarkar (2011) opined that employee engagement is a

barometer that determines the association of a person with the organization

3.0 Research Objective

3.1 General Objective

To analyze and interpret the relation between employee engagement and its impact on productivity in

the organization.

3.2 Specific Objectives

• To analyze and understand how genuine interest in employee‘s well-being, overall

development impacts productivity (career development, work –life balance, learning and

development)

• To understand how relationships are integral to employee engagement and productivity

(relationship with management and peer group)

• To reinstate that rewarding and recognizing employees motivates and infuses enthusiasm,

engages employees and leads to higher retention

• To explore the extent to which engagement in recreational activities helps reduce

absenteeism.



• To analyze how diverse point of view improves decision making process (communication)

• To explore how employee‘s as assets of the organization leads to high performing

organization

• To study how harnessing incredible power of teamwork affects productivity.

4 Research Methodology

Research is a careful investigation or inquiry especially through search for new facts in any branch of

knowledge. Every research study has its own objectives. The procedure adopted by the Research

which works towards the realization of these objectives is known as Methodology. Methods

compromise the procedures used for generating, collecting and evaluating data. Methods are the ways

of obtaining information useful for assessing explanations.

The Objectives of the study were set up and research methodology was determined. Questionnaire

containing 30 items were distributed to employees of organizations.

The collected data was summarized and organized for further analysis. Data analysis was performed

on SPSS to derive relevant information from the data collected. Data was collected and inferences

were drawn.

4.1: Respondents Details

27 among 67 respondents are from age group of 18-30 (40%) 29 are from the age group of 31-45

(43%)and rest belongs to age group of 46-55(11%) .4 are Female and 63 are Male.

4.2: Research Design

Data collected is primary as it was collected by means of questionnaire from employees of Titan. A

structured questionnaire consisting of close ended questions was used for the purpose of this study. A

Likert Scale a five point scale was used in the questionnaire administered for the studies ranging from

strongly disagree to strongly agree.

4.3: Sampling Frame

Sampling Unit – Employees of Titan (Watches Division), Hosur

Sampling Size – 100

4.4: Tools used for analysis

Data Analysis was conducted using (Statistical Package for Social Science).The collected data is

coded, tabulated and analyzed with the help of SPSS using Kaiser Meyer Olkin sampling adequacy

and factor analysis with varimax rotation.

4.5: Data Source:

Tool for collecting data would be Questionnaire.

Questionnaire will be used as the tool for data collection. Questionnaire is a self-report data collection

instrument that each research participant fills out as part of a research study.

4.6: Data Collection Procedure:

Two types of data are collected for this study. They can be classified as follows:

I. Primary data: Primary data refers to the original data that has been collected specially for the

purpose in mind. In other words, it is called as first hand data.

Source of primary data for this study would:Questionnaire



Secondary data: Secondary data is the data that has been already collected by and readily

available from other sources.

Sources of secondary data for this study were:

a) Organization manuals of policies , processes and procedures

b) Journals, Articles and Reviews

c) Researches

d) Internet (World Wide Web).

e) Various books.

5. Data Analysis and Interpretation

Analysis means breaking down the complexity structure with simpler elements and putting these

elements together in new combinations so as to discover new relationships or new factors. This can be

achieved only by viewing data from different angles and by representing the data adequately. With 30

different factors to analyse on employee engagement; factor analysis has been used to reduce the data,

remove redundancy and duplication from a set of co- related variable, as it is the statistical method

used to describe variability among observed, co-related variables mainly, in terms of a potentially

lower number of unobserved variables.

Reliability test was first applied on the collected data. Cronbach‘s Alpha coefficient on 34 items has

been found as .933, suggesting that the items have relatively high internal consistency.

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

.933 34

Factor analysis was employed to confirm the major parameters defining the whole questionnaire. It

was used as a data reduction technique to reduce the number of significant parameters or in other

words to remove redundant variables from the data files.

The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy is a statistic that indicates the proportion of

variance in variables that might be caused by underlying factors.KMO measures sampling adequacy

which should be greater than 0.5 for a satisfactory analysis to proceed. High values .797 indicate that

a factor analysis is useful with data.

Bartlett's test of sphericity tests the null hypothesis that correlation matrix is an identity matrix, which

would indicate that variables are unrelated and therefore unsuitable for structure detection. Value less

than .05 reject the null hypothesis and suggest that all items are perfectly correlated with each other

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling

Adequacy. .797

Bartlett's Test of

Sphericity

Approx. Chi-Square 1304.970

Df 435

Sig. .000



Confirmatory factor analysis, out of the 30 factors selected for measuring employee engagement,

eight were found to be having Eigen values greater than 1. 74.16% data is represented by these eight

factors.

Total Variance Explained

Com

pone

nt

Initial Eigenvalues

Extraction Sums of Squared

Loadings

Rotation Sums of Squared

Loadings

Total

% of

Varian

ce

Cumulativ

e % Total

% of

Variance

Cumulativ

e % Total

% of

Varian

ce

Cumulativ

e %

1 11.55

7

38.525 38.525 11.55

7

38.525 38.525 4.699 15.662 15.662

2 2.345 S```` 47.352 2.648 8.827 47.352 4.542 15.142 30.804

3 1.869 6.230 53.582 1.869 6.230 53.582 2.541 8.471 39.275

4 1.692 5.641 59.223 1.692 5.641 59.223 2.416 8.055 47.330

5 1.248 4.161 63.384 1.248 4.161 63.384 2.379 7.929 55.259

6 1.157 3.857 67.241 1.157 3.857 67.241 2.300 7.667 62.926

7 1.045 3.483 70.724 1.045 3.483 70.724 1.886 6.285 69.211

8 1.031 3.436 74.160 1.031 3.436 74.160 1.485 4.948 74.160

9 .881 2.935 77.095

10 .798 2.661 79.756

11 .679 2.265 82.021

12 .625 2.084 84.105

13 .574 1.914 86.019

14 .516 1.719 87.738

15 .494 1.647 89.385

16 .414 1.381 90.765

17 .381 1.270 92.035

18 .353 1.178 93.213

19 .321 1.070 94.282

20 .303 1.009 95.291

21 .253 .842 96.133

22 .224 .745 96.878

23 .190 .632 97.511

24 .163 .545 98.055

25 .149 .497 98.552

26 .127 .424 98.976

27 .108 .359 99.335

28 .086 .285 99.620

29 .066 .220 99.840

30 .048 .160 100.000

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

The component matrix gives the factor loading .loading above ‗0.6‘ is considered high and below

‗0.5‘ is considered low. Rotated component matrix suppresses all loadings lesser than 0.5 Factor

loadings were identified using rotated component matrix. 8 components were extracted through

Principal Component Analysis have emerged as major factor driving employee engagement



Rotated Component Matrixa

Component

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

material_equipments .210 .657 -.075 .101 .195 .295 .270 .194

expectation .132 .742 .068 .114 .242 .129 .202 .148

workload_distribution .504 .280 .193 -.016 .330 -.125 .045 .482

competency -.026 .794 .083 .122 .122 .277 -.088 .104

proud_of_titan .130 .845 .262 .098 .004 -.011 .012 .121

speak_well_organisation .142 .635 .041 .302 .189 -.021 .432 .010

recognization_and_appreciat

ion

.061 .296 -.036 .075 -.024 .121 -.031 .778

welfare_facilities .203 .297 .049 .481 .319 .269 .093 -.128

promotion_awareness .332 .081 .389 .012 .665 -.077 .100 .175

career_path .189 .087 .300 .354 .176 .230 .363 .436

growth_opportunities -.135 .206 .103 .463 .222 .196 .603 .119

training_facilities .213 .053 .112 -.094 .045 .042 .898 -.048

team_work .174 .060 .799 -.007 -.015 -.042 .220 -.006

working_relationship .149 .355 .672 .244 .002 .130 -.125 -.075

fair_treatment .095 .090 .640 .075 .347 .409 .150 .183

problem_sharing .173 .536 .178 .148 .053 .480 -.018 .124

work_related_issues .396 .405 .145 -.031 .106 .607 .167 .079

communication .207 .252 .034 .149 .086 .759 .080 .051

caring_nature .247 .119 .405 .299 .376 .380 -.012 .290

trust .171 .340 -.116 .228 .678 .244 .078 -.036

offer_suggestions .511 .227 -.189 -.089 .456 .259 .124 -.183

opinion_acceptance .795 .184 .074 -.045 .165 .278 .031 .152

management_care .549 .102 .111 .214 .584 .086 .128 .059

comfortable_workplace .299 .271 .047 .776 .098 .092 .055 .165

friends_at_work .343 .354 .434 .561 -.033 -.009 -.093 .107

health_security .313 .602 .193 .363 .020 .316 -.141 .093

flexible_workschedule .667 .106 .252 .440 .196 -.027 .065 -.008

recreational_activities .781 .014 .186 .214 -.063 .247 .186 .142

good_recreational_facilities .748 .205 .106 .282 .123 .169 -.077 -.101

recreational_facilities_retenti

on

.773 .087 .167 .135 .328 .055 .133 .144

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

a. Rotation converged in 13 iterations.

The eight factors are:

1. Recreational Activities

2. Work

3. Team Work and Immediate Supervisor

4. Quality of Life

5. Opportunities and Immediate Supervisor



6. Communication

7. Training facilities

8. Rewards and Recognition

6. Conclusion

Employee Engagement is the buzz word term for employee communication. It is a positive attitude

held by the employees towards the organization and its values. Its use and importance in the

workplace impacts organizations in many ways. To improve employee engagement the following

steps can work as a guideline: Identify the problem areas to see which are the exact areas, which lead

to disengaged employees Taking action to improve employee engagement by acting upon the problem

areas Nothing is more discouraging to employees than to be asked for their feedback and see no

movement toward resolution of their issues. Even the smallest actions taken to address concerns will

let the staff know how their input is valued. Feeling valued will boost their morale, motivate and

encourage future input. Taking action starts with listening to employee feedback and a definitive

action plan will need to be put in place finally. We would hence conclude that raising and

maintaining employee engagement lies in the hands of an organization and requires a perfect blend of

time, effort, commitment and investment to craft a successful endeavour.

References

1. S.Ramadoss and D.Sengupta, (2011) Employee Engagement, Bizmantra Publication

2. Sunil kumar dhal(2015),A study of Consumer buying behavior and perception towards

laptops in Orissa,International Journal of innovative science and modern

engineering(IJISME),Volume-3,issue-3 January 2015,Pg 1-4

3. Rodd Wagner, (2015) ―The End of Employee Engagement‖, Forbes.com, Available at

www.forbes.com/sites/roddwagner/2015/05/11/the- end-of-employee-engagement/2/

4. Raida Abu Bakar (2013) Understanding factors influencing Employee Engagement: A study

of the financial sector in Malaysia, Available at:

researchbank.rmit.edu.au.eserv/rmit:16047/Abu_Bakar.pdf

5. MaryanaSakovska (2012) Importance of Employee Engagement in Business Environment

Available at: pure.au.dk/portal-asb-student /files/4562876/employee_engagement.pdf

6. ET Bureau (2014) Employee Engagement problems impact productivity of the workforce,

Economic Times, Available at: articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-04-

22/news/49318743-_1_productivity-employers-program

7. Chandrasekhar Sripala (2011) 3C‘S of Employee Engagement: Care, Competence and

Concern, Economic Times, Available at: articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-04-

05/news/29384472/Employee Engagement-myths-bright-future

8. Tony Schwartz (2012) New Research: How Employee Engagement Hits the Bottom Line,

Harvard Business Review, Available at: hbr.org./2012/11/creating-sustainable-employee

9. Laura Stack (2009) Engaged Employees are more productive, theproductivitypro. Com,

Available at: theproductivitypro.com/featured articles/article00135.htm

10. ChandanKhanduja (2014) Employee Engagement in Indian Manufacturing Sector,

mbaskool.com, Available at: mbaskool.com/business-articles/human-resources



http://www.forbes.com/sites/roddwagner/2015/05/11/the-%20end-of-employee-engagement/2/

11. The key to productivity: Employee Engagement, go2hr.com, Available at:

www.go2hr.ca/articles/key-productivity-employee-engagement

12. Tom Newcombe (2013) Employee Engagement and productivity biggest HR challenge for

UK, hrmagazine.co.uk

13. Elizabeth (2013) 10 Employee Engagement Ideas That Get Serious Results, Employee

Engagement, socialworkplace.com



Documents

THE STUDY OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT AND ITS IMPACT …researchscripts.org/global/articles/IJHRM/h201601007.pdfTHE STUDY OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT AND ITS IMPACT ON ... Presenting Titan quartz