1.

Improving employee engagement through participatory management style

“Participatory Management refers to empowering employees of a company to participate in

organizational decision making. Employee engagement refers to the emotional commitment the
employee has to the organization and its goals. Employee engagement is defined in general as
the level of commitment and involvement an employee has towards their organization and its
values. When an employee is engaged, he is aware of his responsibility in the business goals and
motivates his colleagues alongside, for the success of the organizational goals.”

“According to the researches done by Kiernan (1993) Lawler, (1993), Quinn and Spreitzer (1995
and 1997), and Thomas and Velthouse (1990) Participatory styles carry many benefits to the
organization such as facilitate smooth change within the organization, Increase of learning
capabilities (Hinckley, 1985) and improve decision making (Kanter, 1983; Lawler, 1993;
Zeffane, 1996).”

“In essence, participative management is a management style where managers share with the rest
of the members of the organization their influence in the decision making process that is to say,
that contribution in the decision making process is not limited to those who have formal power
positions but with specific characteristics with regards to information systems, training, rewards,
leadership and organizational culture (Pardo-del-Val and Lloyd, 2003).”

“In academic literature a number of definitions for work engagement have been provided. Kahn
(1990) was the first researcher who defined personal engagement as ““harnessing of organization
members’ selves to their work roles; in engagement, people employ and express themselves
physically, cognitively, and emotionally during role performances.” He also defines personal
disengagement as “uncoupling of selves from work roles; in disengagement, people withdraw
and defend themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally during role performances”
(Kahn, 1990). “Kahn (1990) describes meaningfulness, safety and availability as psychological
conditions of engagement and disengagement at work. Harter et al. (2002) took a different
approach and stated that “The term employee engagement refers to the individual’s involvement
and satisfaction with as well as enthusiasm for work” (Harter et al., 2002).”
“The positive attitude of the employee with his work place and its value system is otherwise
called as the positive emotional connection of an employee towards his/her work. Engaged
employees go beyond the call of duty to perform their role in excellence.”

“Employee engagement is a good tool to help every organization to strive to gain competitive
advantage over the others. People is one factor that cannot be duplicated or imitated by the
competitors and is considered the most valuable asset if managed and engaged properly. This
point has been emphasized by Baumruk (2004), in that employee engagement is considered to be
the most powerful factor to measure a company’s vigour.”

“Gallup researchers Fleming and Asplund (2007, p. 2) went a step further and presented
employee engagement as: “the ability to capture the heads, hearts, and souls of your employees
to instill an intrinsic desire and passion for excellence”, thus adding a spiritual element to
Gallup’s established cognitive and emotional aspects of engagement.”

“Ibrahim and Falasi (2014) found that managers should address the importance of engagement in
the public sector in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) because it will enhance employee
performance, increase job satisfaction and consequently lead the organization to achieve goals.
According to Saks the antecedents of employee engagement were job characteristics, perceived
organizational support, Participatory Management, perceived supervisor support, rewards and
recognition, procedural justice and distributive justice. (Maslach et al., 2001; Saks, 2006).”

“According to Seijts and Crim (2006) the Participatory management roles and leadership
behaviors can have positive results as employees become more engaged in the organization.
Yukl et al. (2009), highlighted the fact that participative leader behavior increases the positive
valence of work for subordinates who require more independence, while directive leader
behavior is thought to be especially effective with achievement-focussed employees, because the
leader will clarify objectives and guide their subordinates accordingly (Malik, 2013). Lockwood
(2007) also inferred that effective communication between leader and employee could influence
employee engagement: a leader who positively conveys strategies to subordinates can inspire
employee engagement among those workers.