Perception of employee engagement at the South African Pharmacy Council
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2017
Authors
Fafudi, Mokgadi Daphney
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
High-performing companies are said to differentiate themselves from peers by
paying attention to their clients and their employees (Amato, 2015). Relationships
between people in the organisation are central to understanding relations within
a system, because people relate to each other rather than departments, units and
divisions. If the relationship is sound within an organisation, that spread across
all areas affected by the relationship becomes much more effective than when
the relationships are strained. (Goldman, et al., 2010)
The purpose of the study which was to contribute a better understanding on how
employees at the SAPC consider themselves engaged in performing their job
roles and if that perception is reflected in their performance and to make a
recommendation if necessary. The research question being to identify whether
the perception held by employees on engagement correlates with the aggregate
performance outcome in 2016. The estimated target was 61 employees, however
only 68.89% (42) of employees participated. These participants signed the
consent form, the remainder were either absent during the data collection period
or did not complete the survey
The study tested the psychological conditions perceived by each employee using
aspects 12 variables from Saks and Rotman, (2006). The statistics results found
only five of the twelve suitable to be analysed (described in chapter 4). Based on
chapter 4 results, the five variables evaluated showed a negative perception of
employee engagement. These are concerns that requires attention and the
reasons should be determined so that they be addressed. The results on the job
engagement; job characteristics, perceived supervisors’ support; OCBI;
distributive justice; reward and recognition; and job satisfaction were not
evaluated, as stated in chapter 4.
Meaningfulness in work: described the degree to which staff find meaning
from their work, resulting from the nature of work one does. when they are
feeling worthwhile, useful, and valuable; and perceiving that they are 7
making a difference and not been taken for granted. Includes but not limited
to job control, task variety, feedback (Saks & Gruman, 2014).
Psychological meaningfulness at work: degree to which staff find value in
the workplace, emanating from one’s membership in an organisation, It is
more influenced by factors associated with the organisation itself instead of
employee’s specific tasks (Van der Merwe, Chermack, Kulikowich, & Yang,
2007).
Psychological safety: feeling vital and essential for all types of employee
engagement as the ability for one to employ and express one’s true self
without fear of negative consequences to self-image and status (Kahn,
1990). Employees need to feel safe to completely involve themselves in
roles (Saks & Gruman, 2014). The study suggests that there is a gap within
this, although other variables influencing this were not evaluated.
Availability: The belief that one has the physical, emotional, and
psychological resources required to invest oneself in the performance of a
role. Task and role features and work interactions add value to
meaningfulness which positively affects the availability. Saks and Gruman
(2014) mention four distractions with undesirable influence on psychological
availability being “depletion of physical energy, depletion of emotional
energy, insecurity, and outside lives” (Saks & Gruman, 2014).
The negative response to all five variables evaluated i.e. procedural justice, job
character, organisational engagement, commitment and support, and the existing
intention to quit are concerning to Meaningfulness in work, Psychological
meaningfulness at work and Psychological safety and availability discussed in
points above. Although the seven variables influencing this were not evaluated,
the five procedural justice, organisational engagement, commitment and support,
and the existing intention to quit. There was a general negative response by staff
regarding being engaged by the employer, although they still perform duties in a
commendable manner, as their clients’ perception and performance evaluation
outcome showed.8
Regarding the customer satisfaction, the study does not have information on
the percentage of participants in the SAPC customer satisfaction survey to
measure significance level, however their clients’ satisfaction results were good
as indicated in section 1.2.
The Staff performance evaluation outcome was good as indicated in section
4.4.
The hypothesis was to a reasonable extent tested and that it is true that the
employee perception on meaningfulness of and at work correlates to with their
performance evaluation. The positive customer feedback received also backs up
these results. Future research could investigate the constructs of variables in
Table 3 whether these are appropriate to measure each variable. The SAPC can
also use this study to investigate the concerns further to positively influence the
staff level of engagement. Clearly, they have committed and competent staff, they
need to ensure that the organisation reciprocates that equitably.
Overall, SAPC staff can be commended for the score given by their customers
and their performance report which reflects a consistent achievement which to
some extent is supported by the literature reviewed.
RECOMMENDATION
The SAPC can benefit by conducting a follow-up study to dig deep into the
aspects and categories that scored negatively in employees’ engagement
perception, this being to identify, verify, investigate and address the root cause
of such perceptions. This can be achieved as they are already doing well for a
non-profit organisation. SAPC can improve the perception of staff and achieve a
better performance from the staff which will result in a better customer perception
outcome.
Description
MBA
Keywords
Performance standards. Employees -- Rating of. Achievement motivation.