In a really solid interview of Dr. Arnold Bakker, David Zinger (@DavidZinger) asks about the Jobs Demands-Resources Model that is being used to clarify the understanding of workplace issues of motivation and engagement. I encourage you to look at the interview as well as the explanation of the model to gain your own ideas about how things work and what things can be done differently to impact employee engagement.
But also understand that the two articles referenced in the interview are heavily referenced academic descriptions of models, issues, interactions and comparisons of studies of these topics. You might find them an intellectual challenge to decipher, as I did, although the basic messages are quite clear.
David, who is the organizer of the Employee Engagement Network, feels that Dr. Bakker’s work on people and performance is top shelf and I would agree.
My interests were focused on a couple of things that were said as well as the overall operational structure of the model and how to use it, Bakker said, in part,
My first action would be to create ample opportunities for the exchange of job resources between employees, by creating structural working conditions and processes that foster the exchange of feedback, social support, ideas, communications, etc. These resources would foster work engagement and build cohesion among employees.
David also asked, “If HR practitioners or CEOs were to read just one or two of your articles, which one/s would you recommend?” to which Bakker suggested:
Two articles come to mind. The first I would recommend offers an overview of the Jobs Demands–Resources Theory. This article explains how job demands and resources have unique effects on job stress and motivation. And the other I would suggest covers the daily fluctuations in employee work engagement. Here, I examine the predictors and outcomes of daily engagement, and how individuals can advance work engagement from one day to another.
He also said:
Fortunately, we can influence our own daily levels of employee work engagement by proactively optimizing our job resources. Some examples include talking to enthusiastic colleagues, creating our own positive feedback, and starting new and challenging projects. My current interest is, not surprisingly, particularly in the latter self-management behaviors people use to influence their own work engagement (e.g., job crafting, strengths use, mobilizing ego resources, resource exchange, team boosters).
I read all of the above as “by having a good mental model to reframe our work into making progress forward, we can use our own resources to improve our own resources.” And my view of the model, a bit less detailed than Bakker’s, would actually appear something like this:
After all, the reality is that the Round Wheels are already in the wagon and that sometimes we simply need to step back and reflect in order to reframe our thinking and to get out of the ditch and back up on the road.
If people work together with each other and management, and they take the time to discuss issues and opportunities, realities and best practices and ideas for workplace improvements of any and all kinds, you cannot expect them NOT to be more engaged and involved.
Nobody ever washes a rental car, and people with ownership involvement can be expected to treat things differently than those who are simply showing up, (what I call Presenteeism).
Remember that The Manager is the Motivator when it comes to improving the interactions of people in the workforce. This is NOT a task that can be accomplished by HR or Training and it is a daily occurrence, something that Bakker discusses in his interview and his second article.
I hope this is somewhat thought-provoking,
For the FUN of It!
Dr. Scott Simmerman is a designer of team building games and organization improvement tools. Managing Partner of Performance Management Company since 1984, he is an experienced presenter and consultant.
Square Wheels® is a registered trademark of Performance Management Co.
LEGO® is a trademark of The LEGO Group