The Meaning of Employee Engagement'

This article was downloaded by: [Gadjah Mada University]
On: 21 December 2014, At: 04:03

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
The International Journal of Human

Resource Management
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rijh20
The meaning of employee engagement

for the values and roles of the HRM
function
a
J. Arrowsmith & J. Parker

a
School of Management, Massey University, Auckland, New

Zealand
Published online: 05 Mar 2013.
To cite this article: J. Arrowsmith & J. Parker (2013) The meaning of employee engagement
for the values and roles of the HRM function, The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 24:14, 2692-2712, DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2013.763842
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.763842
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions
The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 2013

Vol. 24, No. 14, 26922712, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.763842
The meaning of employee engagement for the values and roles of the
HRM function
J. Arrowsmith* and J. Parker
Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014
School of Management, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand

Employee engagement has become a dominant part of the vocabulary of human
resource management (HRM), yet there has been little investigation of the implications
of this for HRM in organisations. This article analyses a case study of an initiative at
New Zealand Post designed to improve the engagement and performance of supervisory
staff. It makes two important contributions to the development of the nascent literature.
First, it suggests that effective engagement initiatives require political astuteness and
commitment on the part of HR. This is because they require a clear business case
focused on performance, not merely engagement itself, and an evidence-based
approach to design and implementation. This potential appears to be furthered by the
commonly observed restructuring of HRM into a business partner role. Second, a
purposive approach to employee engagement involves HR interrogating the
employment relationship to address fundamental issues of employee voice, work
design and management agency. This can introduce complications, and resistance, into
the partnership with management, but it also offers a means to reconcile soft
(employee-centred) HRM values to hard (performance) concerns around specific
change management initiatives. Employee engagement thus need not constitute
unitarist subterfuge, but rather something of a neo-pluralist turn in the values and
activities of HRM.
Keywords: business partner; employee engagement; human resource management;
neo-pluralism; pluralism; strategic HRM; unitarism
Introduction
Employee engagement (EE) is now a vital and everyday part of the vocabulary of human
resource management (HRM), used to articulate its core goals and activities to both the
workforce and to senior management. Yet, there is very little empirical research into how
HR managers understand EE; how they develop and implement EE strategies; and what
implications all of these might have for the HR function itself. This paper makes a
contribution to the development of this nascent literature through a case study of one such
initiative at New Zealand (NZ) Post. It does this in two ways that are new. First, it explores
the potential implications of EE for HR values. It argues that the meaningful pursuit of EE
involves an approach predicated on an understanding of the problematic nature of the
employment relationship and an emphasis on the articulation of worker voice. In this way,
HR is not simply following a unitarist agenda to win hearts and minds in pursuit of
management goals around performance (though, of course, this superficial approach might
well be the case in other contexts). Rather, the study suggests that HR activities around EE
might involve a certain degree of advocacy for employees who can challenge
assumptions and practices around work organisation and management agency. The pursuit
*Corresponding author. Email: j.arrowsmith@massey.ac.nz

q 2013 Taylor & Francis
The International Journal of Human Resource Management
2693
of EE may thus combine elements of hard (performance-oriented) and soft (employeeoriented) HRM, which we interpret as a form of neo-pluralism. Second, the case study is
used to explore the nature of EE in terms of HRM roles. Here, it is argued that the
commonly observed restructuring of the HR function into a business partner relationship
with management provides HR professionals with greater scope to devise and implement
relevant EE strategies through the business. This is best served by an evidence-based
approach in which EE is articulated to management as a means to improve cost, revenue
and/or quality as well as an important goal in its own right. It is also observed that though
significant change initiatives are likely to encounter resistance at various levels, successful
outcomes further the credibility of HR as a strategic partner.
The term employee engagement now routinely pervades the discourse of HRM
across the English-speaking world, yet it was virtually unheard of a decade or so ago. The
explosion of professional interest reflects HRs important but largely intuitive notion that
organisational success depends on effective people management, and by implication, HR
strategies and practices, and that staff perceptions are valuable indicators of this.
Furthermore, EE data, which can be related to other measures such as labour productivity,
appraisals, absence and retention, form part of the growing portfolio of HR metrics. This
is linked to the utilisation of increasingly sophisticated HR technologies to better market
functional relevance and internal credibility. From without the organisation too, EE has
been vigorously promoted by local and international HR consultancies, such as Gallup,
Towers Perrin, Deloitte, Mercer and Hewitt.
The measurement of engagement usually rests on employee attitude surveys, and as
such is sometimes used as a novel, catchy label that covers traditional concepts, such as
satisfaction and commitment (Bakker and Leiter 2010, p. 182). Certainly, as Mike Emmott
(2010, p. 40) of the UK Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD)
observes, the recent upsurge of interest in employee engagement . . . on the face of it
owes little to academic research or thinking. The common practitioner understanding is
that EE involves employee enthusiasm for the organisation and the job beyond what might
normally be expected. Engaged employees possess a high degree of cognitive and
affective commitment, which manifests itself in desired behavioural outcomes in short,
they go the extra mile in exercising discretionary effort (Daniels 2011). It is also
recognised in the practical HR literature that EE is a collective activity (focusing on work
groups not just individuals) and a two-way street (employees must feel valued if they are
to add value). This is because EE is essentially a product not just of personal traits but also
of context employee perceptions of the organisation, their working conditions and the
quality of management (Craig and Silverstone 2010).
Understandably, much of the practitioner focus is on the drivers of EE. According to
the CIPD, the key factors are job autonomy, support and coaching, feedback, opportunities
to learn and develop, task variety and responsibility, which contribute to a culture of trust
and respect (Daniels 2011). These dynamics basically concern job quality and good
leadership (JRA 2007). The former relates to intrinsic motivators, such as the work offering
a sense of achievement, as well as decent pay and benefits. The latter depends on good line
management that is, supportive supervision, two-way communication, effective
performance management that sets clear goals and recognises contribution, and employee
coaching and development (MacLeod and Clarke 2009).
This conception of EE has attracted growing interest in recent years from academic
psychologists concerned with employee motivation and well-being (Jeung 2011). A
growing consensus has emerged, as in the practitioner literature, that EE offers
something new in integrating satisfaction and commitment with behaviour (Saks 2006;
2694
J. Arrowsmith and J. Parker
Robertson-Smith and Markwick 2009). For example, Nohria, Groysberg and Lee (2008,
p. 80) see EE as the energy, effort, and initiative employees bring to their jobs, which is
differentiated from, whilst related to, satisfaction (the extent to which they feel that the
company meets their expectations at work and satisfies its implicit and explicit
contracts) and commitment (the extent to which employees engage in corporate
citizenship). In short, an employee may feel well satisfied in his or her job and be well
disposed to the organisation, without necessarily translating this into levels of effort and
performance that surpass typical expectations.
In contrast to this attention from psychologists, and notwithstanding the active concern
of HR professionals, there remains very little interest or research on EE from HR and
employee relations scholars (Robinson, Perryman and Hayday 2004). This is not to say
that the themes of EE are unexplored within analyses of, say, the psychological contract
(Guest and Conway 2004), high-performance or high-commitment work systems
(Wood 1999; Appelbaum, Bailey, Berg and Kalleberg 2000), but an explicit focus on EE is
rare. For example, of a recent clutch of authoritative collections in the field (Storey 2007;
Blyton, Bacon, Fiorito and Heery 2008; Boxall, Purcell and Wright 2008; Storey, Ulrich,
Welbourne and Wright 2009; Wilkinson, Bacon, Redman and Snell 2010), only the latter
addresses EE specifically and the others make no reference to the term at all. There is,
therefore, an absence of research concerning important issues, such as (1) HR
understanding of EE, (2) the formulation and implementation of EE strategies by HR and
(3) how these are received and with what effects by actors, such as senior and local line
management and trade unions, as well as employees, within organisations. Given the
widespread utilisation of EE concepts and discourse by HR, this is a major research gap.
This paper explores these issues by examining an HR initiative at NZ Post. The explicit
objective of the HR project was to improve the engagement and leadership ability of the
organisations supervisors, and thereby (hopefully) the engagement and performance of
the workforce. The case study examines how the HR function defined its approach to EE,
which drew on practitioner and academic literatures, and developed and implemented its
strategy. The results have two sets of implications that are likely to be of wider relevance.
First, effective EE initiatives can involve a significant degree of workplace transformation,
which implies that they are most likely to succeed when Brockbank and Ulrichs (2009)
three conditions for strategic HRM (SHRM) are met, namely business knowledge, changemanagement capability, and well-designed and delivered HR basics. In contrast to the
expectations of some of the literature (see below), this may be facilitated by a business
partner role where HR has a collaborative relationship with management.
Second, and more fundamentally, in problematising EE even, indeed especially, in
lower-skill work HR may be driven to critically examine the employment relationship,
thus refocusing beyond immediate functional concerns to address wider issues of work
design and management agency. Hence, it is argued that the pursuit of EE may represent
something of a neo-pluralist turn by HR because, taken seriously, it involves seeking and
utilising employee perspectives to effect change in the management and organisation of
their work. This involves much more than simply offering technical services to
management in pursuit of a unitarist agenda, even if the process is largely predicated
(or internally marketed) around mutual gains.
In the next section (HRM and employee engagement), we briefly review literature to
locate the potential relevance and implications of EE in the concept and practice of HRM.
Section three (Methods and context) outlines the research methods and contextualises the
case. This is followed by the results, a discussion section which sets out key issues for
2695
future research, and conclusions, which draw out the wider implications for HR and its
relationship with management.
HRM and employee engagement

As noted above, EE is of growing interest to academic psychologists, largely stimulated by
debate over how it should be defined and differentiated from conventional measures. The
term was fairly unknown until Kahn (1990) used it specifically to describe workers who
were highly absorbed in the performance of their work. It gained traction when Maslach
and Leiter (1997) referred to engagement as the polar opposite of burnout, a term which
also, incidentally, crossed over from the popular to academic psychological literature. The
influential Utrecht team also define and operationalise engagement in this way (Schaufeli,
Salanova, Gonzalez-Roma and Bakker 2002; Schaufeli and Bakker 2010). Others see it as
the converse of alienation or apathy and detachment from work (e.g. May, Gilson and
Harter 2004). Common to these approaches, however, is the importance of job demands
and job resources, not just personal characteristics, in shaping attitudes and behaviours at
work. Still, the novelty of engagement, and conflation with a range of well-established
constructs, such as organisational commitment, job satisfaction, involvement, work flow,
and extra role and organisational citizenship behaviours, means that it remains an
ambiguous and contentious concept. As Macey and Schneider explain
The notion of employee engagement is a relatively new one . . . engagement is a concept with
a sparse and diverse theoretical and empirically demonstrated nomological net the
relationships among potential antecedents and consequences of engagement as well as the
components of engagement have not been rigorously conceptualized, much less studied.
(2008, pp. 3 4)
Of course, such conceptual concerns do not readily trouble HR. The fundamental appeal of
EE for HR managers is its behavioural as well as attitudinal focus on performance. What
distinguishes engagement from concepts such as satisfaction and commitment is its
grounding in performance outcomes, and it is a (people-centred) concern with business
performance that largely distinguishes HRM from its previous incarnation as personnel
management (Guest 1989). Whereas personnel management was largely seen as a support
function providing administrative, employee welfare and conflict resolution services to
management, HRM is keen to market its value-added and strategic contribution in pursuit
of goals such as employee commitment, flexibility and quality. EE offers both a concept
and a set of metrics for HR to utilise to this end.
We might infer that the implications of this will vary according to HR values and
structure, as well as of course organisational context and business strategy. In terms of
values, this can be informed by the long-standing distinctions between soft and hard
HRM, and unitarist and pluralist approaches. Simply put, a hard approach to HRM
serving an unitarist agenda might be expected to adopt a very different take on EE than
one in which employee concerns are viewed as a legitimate priority in their own right.
Structure refers to the positioning of the function within the organisation. Most relevant
here is the increasing reorganisation of HRM into business partner arrangements and
what this means for its role and focus. These two sets of issues are now briefly considered
in turn.
HRM values
The term unitarism, as originally used by Fox (1974, p. 135), refers to employer
strategies of trade union avoidance based on and justified by an ideology of a unity of
2696
interests between employers and employees (with one source of authority and leadership
but one focus of loyalty). The contemporary notion of managerialism refers more
broadly to the assertion of managerial rights, goals and prerogatives without the need for
meaningful employee involvement (Clarke and Newman 1997). In contrast to these
conceptions, a pluralist management approach sees the organisation as a coalition of
interest groups over which management presides in an authoritative but not authoritarian
manner, recognising employee rights (Fox 1974, p. 10).
For academics, it was almost axiomatic that unitarism was one of the defining features
of HRM as it emerged in the 1980s when a seismic shift was taking place between labour
and capital (Mueller and Carter 2005, p. 369). As Janssens and Steyaert put it
HRM is impregnated by a unitarist approach to managing the employment relationship. HRM
seems to take for granted that employees well-being and organizational goals can always be
aligned and that managers, employees, and HR professionals will all work collaboratively
towards a common goal of efficiency and high performance levels. (2009, p. 145)
A similar charge is often levelled at the academic study of HRM too. According to
Delbridge and Keenoy, mainstream HRM research is heavily dominated by a
managerialist agenda geared towards best practice prescription:
the fundamental shift involved the replacement of a pluralist framing of the issues in
which the employment relationship is understood to involve and articulate differential
interests with a unitary framing of the issues in which all members of an organisation
are assumed to have mutual interests. (2010, p. 802)
In contrast, a more critical approach to HRM and the management of labour focuses on
the structured antagonism inherent in the employment relationship (Edwards 1986). This
acknowledges that whilst there is a mutual dependency between employer and workers,
employment is also characterised by conflicting goals and interests and is fundamentally
based on unequal power relations. Unlike in the unitarist or managerialist view, both
motivation and control, and cooperation and conflict, are normal features of employment
in the critical or pluralist approach.
As it happens, this idea is certainly not foreign to HR practitioners, who continually
contend with the organisational paradoxes and contradictions of managing commitment
and insecurity, empowerment and control (Legge 2007, pp. 115 116). Empirical
research also shows that HR managers are well aware of the realities of different interests
and contests in the organisation, not just between management and labour but also
between different levels and functions of management. To take one example, Vickers and
Fox (2010, p. 899) note how HR practice is a highly political management process that is
not always wholly congruent with the immediate objectives and values of the business.
Related to the distinction between managerialism and pluralism is the idea of hard or
soft HRM (Truss, Gratton, Hope-Hailey, McGovern and Stiles 1997). The centrality of
the employee in engagement suggests that it might naturally be informed by the latter, and
its themes of employee commitment and mutual gains can be traced back to the human
relations school in the 1930s (Godard and Delaney 2000). However, at another level, EE
may be seen as a conflation of hard and soft HRM, emphasising both the human and the
resource dimensions. First, in terms of outcomes, HR initiatives are focused on
performance and on demonstrating the HR contribution to the business. There is,
therefore, some resemblance to Legges (1995, p. 35) characterisation of utilitarian
instrumentalism in terms of goals. Yet, in terms of process, EE necessitates a focus on
employee commitment and capabilities, drawing on a developmental humanism that
emphasises the importance of respect, trust and voice at work. EE thus may be seen as an
2697
instance of what Watson (2004, p. 455) refers to as hard soft HRM, in which employee
concerns are to a certain extent recognised and addressed to further broader and longerterm corporate goals.
From this, we can hypothesise that EE may be perceived by HR in two ways. In the
unitarist vision, it is largely unproblematic, involving the identification and resolution of
obstacles to the natural order of harmony in the workplace. This might involve careful
attention to recruitment and selection and interventions around reward schemes,
management training and the like. For those of a more pluralist disposition, the pursuit of
EE is much more complex and dynamic, and the outcome uncertain. It involves a
commitment to better understanding and managing the employment relationship within
specific contexts, with a premium on analysis and action around employee concerns
(Purcell 2012).
HRM role
One of the most remarkable developments in HRM practice in recent years is the
separation of advisory and strategy roles from its operational and administrative
dimensions (CIPD 2003). This largely involved the development of business partner
arrangements that may take the form of internal consultancies (Wright 2008). Though the
effects of this have not been fully researched, two alternative outcomes for EE might be
anticipated. First, the new structures marginalise employee-focused activities as HR
becomes fragmented and dedicated to a business-driven agenda of competitive advantage
(van Buren, Greenwood and Sheehan 2011). In this view, the business facing facets of
HRM discursively swamp other concerns, notably about employee well-being and HRs
role in and responsibility for securing it (Keegan and Francis 2010, p. 874). Alternatively,
employee focus or advocacy may be complemented by the increased status and influence
introduced by business partnership, even if its discourse may not find a ready audience
with management (Ulrich and Brockbank 2005). In this scenario, HR has to be more
sophisticated and politically astute in how they address employee concerns, or more
precisely, how they reconcile this to the competitiveness agenda. Roche and Teague
(2013, p. 1354) recently found that even in recession HR managers were at ease blending
a business partner role with a more traditional employee advocacy role. However, it
remains unclear how far and under what conditions the restructuring of the HR function
along business partner lines serves to restrict or permit the pursuit of EE-related
initiatives.
There is thus a clear need for research into the politics of EE in organisations. The
research questions for this study are specifically concerned with how the HR function
conceives of EE, and how its strategies and policies are developed and implemented in
practice. It is also concerned with the implications of this for our understanding of HR
values and structure in practice.
Methods and context
The research is based on a case study of a HR change initiative at NZ Post. Case studies are
well established as an important tool for exploratory research, contributing insights or
hypotheses to an emerging research agenda (Hartley 1994). Similarly, in summarising and
looking forward from a recent edited collection of EE research, Bakker and Leiter (2010,
p. 193) note that management intervention studies hold the greatest potential for theory,
research and practice. This is because a focus on interrelationships and processes can
2698
provide a conceptual richness that cross-sectional surveys cannot deliver. With this in
mind, this research investigates the dynamics of developing, implementing and evaluating
a particular HR initiative focusing on EE and performance (the management intervention)
in a case study setting the delivery business of NZ Post, and in particular, its most
important pilot implementation site.
The research was conducted between 2009 and 2011 and was mainly based on 12 faceto-face interviews and a review of relevant documentation. The interviews included HR
and line managers who were involved in the design and roll out of the programme (two
with the relevant Head Office HR manager, one with a regional HR manager and two with
branch managers at the case study site). Interviews were also conducted with six team
leaders (TLs) at the pilot site, and we were also able to informally talk to employees on two
workplace visits. The management interviews lasted between one hour and two and half
hours, and the employee interviews lasted for around 45 minutes each on average. All but
the first two (gatekeeper) interviews were recorded and professionally transcribed. In
addition, managers responded to supplementary queries by email and telephone. The
documentary data included a post-implementation review of the initiative prepared by the
group HR and business managers; work organisation templates; role descriptions;
implementation and accreditation guideline documents; and research evidence from
internal surveys and interviews of TLs and shop floor staff.
The generation and analysis of the data involved a process of triangulation in which
each of the constituent elements spoke to each other. For example, the initial informal
interviews with senior management led to the provision of documentation that helped
refine the research agenda and in particular the development of the management interview
schedules. These two sets of data also helped form the basis for subsequent interviews with
employees from which we could compare the two sets of accounts. Remote contact with
managers also helped to clarify details arising from the interviews and documentation.
Because the research used a relatively small set of respondents and was based on semistructured interview schedules, it was possible to manually code and analyse the interview
notes and transcripts, and to reconcile these with the other data sources.
In case study research, which makes claims for analytical rather than statistical
generalisation, it is important to clearly establish the context for the research problem
under consideration (Yin 2009). As in most developed nations, the NZ postal service is one
of the countrys oldest, largest and most familiar institutions. It dates back to the 1840s,
and was run as a government department until becoming a state-owned enterprise (SOE)
in 1987. The State-Owned Enterprises Act 1986 obliges SOEs to act both commercially,
as a successful business . . . as profitable and efficient as comparable businesses that are
not owned by the Crown, and as a good employer, with personnel policies and practices
necessary for the fair and proper treatment of employees in all aspects of their
employment. NZ Post is currently one of NZs largest commercial organisations, with
more than 11,000 employees and a further 7000 employed in affiliated operations.
The company has been profitable since its incorporation as an SOE, during which time
it has returned more than NZ$1 billion to the state in taxes and dividends. A significant
part of its success owed much to early restructuring, on becoming an SOE, to improve the
efficiency and culture of the organisation, accompanied by investment in new mail centres
and technology (Toime 1997). Also important was a consistent policy of cooperation with
the union that achieved significant change through negotiation (Pfeffer 1998, p. 243;
Elcano, Reisner, German and Cernshaw 2002). A recent major example of negotiated
change is the introduction of a radical new pay model for postal workers, based on
delivered mail volume rather than hours worked, in the most recent collective agreement
2699
(to June 2013). This was developed by a joint management union working party and
recommended by the unions after successful trials at seven delivery branches. The
company recognises two unions: the Postal Workers Union of Aotearoa (PWU) and the
Engineering Printing and Manufacturing union (EPMU). The EPMU is a large general
union that claims to represent 4500 NZ Post workers, including 2500 delivery and sorting
staff, and it has long maintained a formal partnership relationship with the company. The
PWU is smaller, with an estimated 900 members in the delivery business, and markets
itself as more militant or member-driven. Collective bargaining is conducted separately
for the two unions on a two-year cycle.
The delivery business employs 4500 people, with around 2300 postal workers
(posties) employed at 120 urban sites around the country. It has faced mounting
challenges in recent years. First, the deregulation of the postal market in 1998 intensified
competitive pressures on a company that remained obliged to operate a universal service.
Second, the Internet transformed the business landscape, not only reducing domestic and
international mail traffic because of substitution by email and digital transfer, but also
recomposing it with delivery of items purchased online and increased direct marketing.
The number of items processed each year remains high but volumes are in steep decline,
from 1.1 billion in 2002 to 829 million in 2012. These items are also heavier, bulkier and
more diverse, which means they are more difficult and expensive to deliver. Third, an
increase in delivery points, a corollary to demographic and social change, also brought
pressures on productivity and costs. Compared to 1999, the company now delivers a fifth
less volume to a third more addresses. The annual decline in volume is predicted to
proceed at 4.5% per annum over the next decade, culminating in half current loads. (In
fact, mail volumes fell 6.4% in the 2011/2012 financial year, leading to a $10 million loss
on postal services that prompted the company to seek a revision to its Deed of
Understanding obliging it to deliver six days per week.) All of this has major implications
for employment, since the processing and delivery of domestic mail is a labour-intensive
operation with high fixed cost, of which around 70% is employment related.
One important response was to upgrade mail processing systems and equipment. A
revised national postcode scheme was introduced in 2006, accompanied by investment in
sorting machinery in the six primary conurbations. Processing capacity and productivity
was also improved through a series of branch amalgamations and modernisation of
facilities. On the software side, HR introduced a new strategy called Creating a High
Performance Culture that involved creating a world class operational environment,
developing high-performing leaders, building a highly engaged workforce and
redesigning work and pay systems to meet the changing needs of the business. The HR
leadership within the operations business believed employee engagement and
performance to be mutually reinforcing, and saw the challenges faced by the business
as an opportunity to contribute concrete initiatives under its overall framework.
The EE-performance initiative
Frontline leadership was identified as the key issue, according to the group HR manager,
because it was seen as crucial to delivering consistent results, workplace change and
employee engagement. The role of the 180 TLs employed in the delivery business
involves matching staffing resources to fluctuating mail volumes, dealing with employee
relations issues and managing workforce performance. The changing nature of the
business meant that the work was increasingly challenging. The TLs had to deal with
increasing complexity resulting from the variation in mail types and volumes, and they
2700
also had to have the people skills to manage and motivate an increasingly diverse and often
pressured workforce. This could be a difficult balancing act. In particular, the job and
finish system, whereby posties are free to go home after completion of their round, places
a premium on effective work planning and performance management. Too little work
means paying posties whilst at home, and too much incurs overtime pay together, this
was costed at NZ$8 million in 2008. At the same time, supervisors want to avoid allocating
too many cut ups, which is supplementing a run with work from other rounds. This was
intensely disliked by staff due to unfamiliarity as one TL told us, as soon as the postie
sees the word cut up on the board, everyone gets angry, they hate it.
For HR, evidence of the problem came from a number of sources. First, the balanced
scorecard (BSC) data revealed significant inconsistencies across branches in terms of
operational performance and in the level and management of employee grievances and
disciplinary cases. Succession planning analysis also suggested that few in the TL roles
were considered to have the potential to develop further. Second, the trade unions were
concerned that the company could do more to help the TLs, both to develop their own
careers and to make them more effective managers. The issue was explicitly raised in the
2002 negotiating round, especially by the EPMU which has a TL membership, and again
in 2004. Third, the Gallup-based EE survey revealed that TLs were increasingly uncertain
and apprehensive in the changing work environment. Some felt they were not fully
accepted as managers by the company, whereas others had difficulties differentiating
themselves from the team even though they were generally perceived as management by
staff. In the words of the Head Office HR manager, many felt themselves in no-mans
land or as the meat in the sandwich rather than as credible leaders in their own right.
Given this context, HR felt that the conventional approach of investing in training was,
by itself, inadequate. The company had long offered a range of management development
programmes to TLs, including in performance management, coaching, communicating
and relationship management, but these had evidently not delivered generalised and
enduring results. It was understood that the mutually reinforcing problem of deteriorating
engagement and performance required a more fundamental approach, based on an analysis
of the job pressures and resources involved in the existing roles. A successful bid was
made for resourcing to support a small (1.5 full-time equivalent) corporate-based project
team with a remit to review branch management practices and develop a framework for a
best-practice delivery operation. For political reasons, this was led by a sympathetic
senior line manager (a regional delivery business leader), working in conjunction with a
senior HR manager. The project was labelled Great Operations and Leadership (GOAL).
Conceptual and research foundations
The GOAL team started from the premise that employee engagement and effectiveness
were iteratively related; EE was a consequence as well as a driver of a high-performance
work environment. Improvements to the operational system and the capabilities of the
frontline leadership would sustain higher performance both directly (by enhancing
competencies) and by generating greater enthusiasm for the job. This in turn was expected
to have performance- and engagement-enhancing effects for their staff reports. The
argument was developed and presented to senior line management using what has been
called the AMO theory, derived from high-performance work surveys in the 1990s
(Boxall and Purcell 2003). In this approach, high performance is viewed as a product of
employee ability (e.g. education and skills); motivation (a product of e.g. job security,
information sharing, development opportunities, fair pay and incentives); and opportunity
2701
to participate (related to e.g. job discretion, team-working and direct involvement). At NZ

Post, a fourth dimension direction was added, reflecting the perceived importance of
leadership to all aspects of performance. The four components were presented in broad
terms in the documentation:
. ability embraces knowledge, skills, mental and physical capability, and emotional
intelligence;
. motivation refers to values, attitude, incentives, the confidence to do the job and
whether the job was seen as worthwhile;
. opportunity encompasses features of the organisational environment, such as time,
equipment, budget, job design, support systems and the physical environment; and
. direction includes the elaboration and communication of expectations, relevant
performance measures, feedback, coaching and understanding and application of
consequences.
The project team argued that this provided an analytical framework to explore
performance issues from different perspectives; the idea is that problems reflect a
weakness in one or more of these components. For example, a TL might have the ability
and motivation to lead his or her people really well, but if the design of the role meant that
he or she spent much of their time on administration or assisting workers in carrying out
their own tasks, then he or she would lack the opportunity to perform a leadership role
effectively.
The GOAL team then conducted research through TL interviews, focus groups and an
anonymous survey. The exercise identified potential weaknesses in each of the areas
relating to what was styled as AMOD (i.e. ability, motivation, opportunity and
direction). In terms of ability, there were problems of communication skills and modelling
appropriate behaviour; effective operation of the performance management system; and in
work planning and technical knowledge. Many TLs had low educational attainment (40%
had no qualifications and 20% school certificate only) and had not entered the position
from any succession planning process. Most were motivated to perform well in their role,
but saw their job in negative terms as difficult, stressful and not valued as part of the
overall management team. This in turn reflected problems relating to opportunity, such as
a wide range of accountabilities, unclear reporting lines and large team size, and direction,
with insufficiently focused performance measures and an apparent lack of consequences
for those consistently failing to meet objectives.
The project team was also keen to involve managers in the development of the analysis
and proposals. A series of workshops was held with managers at all levels of the business
to develop a vision of what a high-performance team might look like. The resultant model
set out a number of expectations for posties and TLs. These concerned the working
environment, operating processes and customer focus, employee performance management, consultation and participation and employee relations. It also referred to a range of
outcome measures such as complaints, absenteeism, turnover, injuries, overtime, unit
costs and team Gallup results. Within this template, employee engagement and
performance were viewed as clearly reinforcing and virtually synonymous. The bestpractice team was characterised as a model of workplace engagement, marked by
outstanding business results but also a positive energy and attitude and a balance of
work and fun.
The research led to a number of proposals concerning job redesign, skills development
and performance management for frontline leaders, organised under the AMOD
framework. To address ability, individual development plans were to be introduced
2702
(based on the Lominger competency framework) delivered through a modular framework

involving 70% structured learning on the job, 20% coaching and 10% from formal training
resources such as workshops and written material. The training programme was developed
by a working group that involved operational managers as well as learning and
development specialists. Motivation was to be addressed by implementing a new
recruitment strategy aimed to attract high performers to the roles as well as to re-motivate
existing frontline leaders by significant job redesign. Roles and structures were redefined
to provide more time for leadership activities, and a new support role was proposed to
assist TLs. Clearer direction was also provided via new job descriptions and performance
measures.
The central part of the change programme was the introduction of redefined and new
roles, which included granting greater budgetary responsibility to TLs. The role
restructuring was intended to free leaders from operational activities to devote more time
to people, planning and business management. This is indicated by Table 1 that records
and estimates the time dedicated to these three sets of responsibilities in the existing and
new roles (based on daily diary records for existing post holders and estimates for the new
roles). Typically, under the new structure, a delivery TL (DTL) would manage between 14
and 20 posties, plus 1 delivery support worker. The latter was a new position designed to
relieve the TL of basic operational and administrative work. The leadership
responsibilities of DTLs include selecting, inducting, training and developing team
members, conducting quarterly individual performance and development discussions
and regular team briefings and managing discipline. They were also encouraged to have
daily personal contact with each member of their team, who are only present in the branch
for a couple of hours per day. Several DTLs report to a delivery group leader (DGL) who
may have responsibilities across one or more locations depending on the branch size.
Implementation
Following the research phase, a report was delivered to the senior management detailing
the findings and proposed initiatives. However, strong concerns were raised that the
project would cost time and money to implement without providing a direct business (i.e.
financial) benefit, at a time when other changes were being implemented. The BSC had
only recently been introduced, and further HR-related changes were planned for incentive
pay and in upgrading the work measurement system. At the same time, many branches
were affected by the introduction of new technology and branch amalgamations. The
report was also criticised as having no measure of progress or completion. According to
Table 1. Actual and estimated time dedicated to job activities.
Activity time (%)
Established roles
Delivery branch leader (large)
Delivery branch leader (medium)
Delivery team leader
New roles
Delivery group leader
Delivery team leader
Delivery support
People
Planning and business management
Operations
65
40
22
12
10
7
23
50
71
60
75
5
35
15
5
5
10
90
2703
senior HR management, some in the business were passionate supporters, some were
against and there were a lot in the middle waiting to see who won the battle. A major
objection concerned the financial implications of introducing the new supporting roles and
recognising the increased responsibilities of TLs by higher grading. As reported by HR, a
senior delivery managers response was yeah, well, show me the money. All I can see is
that youre changing the structure, youre adding in cost. The comment of another
regarding the emphasis on the need to improve EE was simply, you cant bank
engagement!.
The response of the GOAL team was to propose a pilot exercise and an accreditation
framework designed to measure and evaluate progress through various stages of
completion, and this was agreed by the senior management. Piloting GOAL involved a
process, tailored to the implementation site, of reviewing and revising job descriptions,
objectives and measures; recruiting to new roles and inducting successful applicants;
providing close on-the-ground support to incumbents for their first six months, with eight
workshops for group and TLs (five for delivery support) and a range of supporting
documentation. Accreditation involved the observation of actual practice, interviewing
staff at all levels and a review of relevant evidence (e.g. meeting notes, planning
documents, individual performance-planning documents and development plans). An
interim review was conducted after 12 months, followed by a formal audit of practice
against defined criteria in six key areas. These were: leadership (including communication,
team meetings); planning (goal setting and action plans); customer focus (communication
and use of customer data); information and resources (e.g. analysis of performance data);
HR focus (e.g. job design, recruitment, induction and succession planning, performance
management, training and development, safety and well-being, and employee
engagement); and process management (management control and risk frameworks).
The first pilot site was Christchurch City branch, and a GOAL programme manager
was deployed to work alongside the regional and site leaders to implement the initiative.
One of the early learning points of this exercise was the difficulty of undertaking a
significant culture change programme in a live business environment. Operational
pressures diverted attention from implementation, and many staff were suspicious or
resistant to change. Whilst this strengthened the case for the dedicated commitment of
resources, in fact progress was stalled by a company-wide restructuring. This meant that
existing HR projects were terminated, handed over to business units or transferred to a new
business improvement division. It was decided that GOAL should be absorbed by the
delivery business, and the initiative lost its programme manager.
Christchurch City was successfully accredited, with positive outcomes reported
around communication, teamwork and TL motivation. However, given the lack of
dedicated resources, subsequent implementation sites had to be especially carefully
chosen. Key considerations for HR were that regional business leaders had to be
supportive, and that they as a function were able to provide local managers with a high
level of support. It was also felt that a successful pilot in Auckland, the largest city in NZ
with a third of the nations population, would provide a boost for the project as a whole. By
the end of 2008, two more delivery branches had implemented GOAL: North City
(Porirua, Wellington) and Marua Road in Auckland. The latter is generally seen as a best
practice operation and, given that it began life as one of the most problematic sites, its
success eventually convinced the senior management to adopt a form of GOAL standards
nationwide.
2704
The Marua Road pilot

The Auckland delivery office based at Marua Road was opened in October 2006 as the
largest branch in the country with 120 posties working in five district teams. It was formed
from an amalgamation of five small branches. According to the Head Office HR manager:
there was quite a bit of soul searching went on about whether it was worth taking on trying to
put the Goal Programme into this branch when it was already enough of a challenge
amalgamating five branches. But I think there was a sense that if youre going to operate on
the patient, you may as well fix everything while youve got them open before you . . .
As feared, the project did not have an auspicious start. The amalgamation brought together
staff from branches with different cultures and leadership and performance expectations,
and there were early power plays between TLs and different union representatives. As one
TL put it, some branches had had a more relaxed approach to permitting overtime or
leaving work until the next day, a practice not permitted under the new system. Of the five
branches, only two teams maintained the same staff and posties found it difficult to get
used to new systems and work colleagues. Equally, some of the TLs had more difficulty
than others in adapting to the standardisation and new performance management
responsibilities associated with GOAL.
The implementation process proceeded with a consultation exercise to draw up new
job descriptions for the TL role. These placed a strong emphasis on the performance
management of staff. The TLs then commenced their GOAL training. They reported that
they found the first six months particularly hard as they had to combine the training (nine
workshops for DGLs and DTLs, 5 for delivery supports plus 19 information booklets and
other materials) with new responsibilities, such as the continuous recording of data
(extending to details of the required daily conversations with each staff member), mainly
for the purposes of the eventual GOAL audit. The TLs also had to draw up development
plans for each postie and undertake a formal one-to-one appraisal each quarter. The TLs
themselves were appraised on a monthly basis and were also involved in regular
management meetings where business results and progress against plans were discussed
against the BSC. All of this amounted to an entirely new way of working for most of the
TLs, at a time when they still had to run a busy operation. The inaugural branch manager
went so far as to describe the early atmosphere as toxic, and the HR manager assigned to
assist her with GOAL said
it was fair to say the levels of engagement were quite low . . . people were coming in, learning
new rounds; the structure had changed the people that they were used to reporting to some
of them had left. And the team leaders . . . used to run their own branches and now they
actually have to report through to someone.
Given the operational importance of the site and its significance for GOAL, senior HR
management allowed one of its HR consultants to spend four months almost full-time at
the branch to assist with implementation. As part of this role, she conducted weekly focus
groups with staff to identify and resolve concerns as well as hold regular meetings with the
union reps:
I guess, for me, it was about getting them understanding that I was actually there to help them
as opposed to coming in (each week) as the HR consultant, raking them up, leaving. I really
had to get to understand the business. I went through all of the reports, I sat down with team
leaders, I spoke to posties . . . I think they actually saw that I was wanting to see the branch
actually succeed.
In the event, three of the TLs decided to leave within the first three months (two after
receiving letters of expectation) which, whilst having a positive impact in the long run,
2705
was a challenging time for everyone in terms of workload and stress (branch manager).
Their replacements were recruited from the existing workforce, and they said they were
attracted by the emphasis on teamwork, communication and development under GOAL
compared to other branches.
Also fortuitous was the departure for Australia of the regional official of the PWU,
which generally markets itself as fighting for members compared with the partnership
approach of the larger union (branch-level density was estimated at a third for each).
Management at the branch were able to build a better relationship with his replacement,
who was said to be more sympathetic to the rationale of the initiative. According to
interviewees, the workplace postie union reps adopted a neutral position towards GOAL
(as it was a TL initiative), whilst waiting to assess any impact on their members. The TLs
reported an increasingly oppositional stance in the early stages, though less so from the
EPMU (Ive got the EPMU delegate in my team and hes been pretty much okay with it
the whole way). This reflected the workload implications of, for example, additional
training and more regular one-on-ones; a reduction in overtime for some as routes
became managed more effectively; plus recourse to disciplinary procedures for a number
of staff as standards around issues such as non-delivery of mail, un-notified absence, and
health and safety were more strictly enforced. However, after the transition stage, the
unions became much more positive, as posties began to see better leadership and support
from their TLs, and a more consistent approach to managing performance. It was also felt
that subsequent changes to the branch management team provided a further opportunity
for the union reps to rebuild relations.
The branch achieved GOAL accreditation in September 2008 and this was renewed in
September 2010. A business impact review found significant improvements over the first
year of implementation. Overall, the branch achieved a favourable budget variance of
4.3% (i.e. a saving for the year of NZ$205,000) within a challenging budget for
2007/2008, and came in at between 5% and 7% under budget in successive years. This
reflected improvements in productivity, with the unit costs measure (cents per letter
equivalent unit, LEU) improving by nearly 12% against an upward national trend. The
postie productivity measure also steadily improved throughout the GOAL period (98.52%
from 84.79%) and there was also a 50% reduction in overtime. The overall measure of
hours used for the mail volume processed showed steady improvement over the year, from
31.17% to 15.06%. There was also a steady decline in customer complaints, which halved
from 23.28 per million LEUs to 12.08 by February 2008. In addition, the lost time injury
frequency rate (number of lost time injuries per 200,000 work hours) fell from 15.49 to
4.97 over the same period. This was also reflected in reduced employee absence and
turnover; absenteeism fell from 4.36% to 1.80% over the 12 months and, though turnover
remained high in what was a buoyant labour market, the figure of 34.34% compared well
to the 43.72% in other Auckland branches. Following this review, six sigma reporting
mechanisms were also used to report back positive results and convince top management
of the value of the project. The regional delivery business leader involved in the project
team concluded that
GOAL has been instrumental in taking Marua Road from a dysfunctional amalgamation of
five poorly performing delivery branches to a cohesive, best practice site where staff at all
levels are engaged and performing effectively.
There was also positive feedback from the posties and TLs themselves. The company
operates the Gallup 12-question EE survey that explores perceptions of growth
opportunities, teamwork, management support and basic work needs utilising five-point
2706
Likert scales. The mean score rose from 3.6 in March 2007 to 4.1 in March 2008,
representing the largest improvement in the country. Qualitative comments indicated that
posties appreciated having more time to talk with their TL and also the transparency and
consistency of the performance expectations according to HR, around a fifth of the
comments submitted to the EE survey tend to be complaints about management not doing
anything about the posties mucking about or pulling sickies. An additional survey of
posties also showed a positive perception of the Marua Road workplace, not just in terms
of improvement over the year but when compared to previous branches. Staff rated the
branch especially highly in terms of communication, approachability of TLs and
individual support (Table 2).
Interviews with the TLs indicated that they too were more satisfied in their roles,
largely because they enjoyed better relations with staff but also as they became more
comfortable in managing poor performance and applying appropriate coaching and
disciplinary interventions:
GOAL has made a huge difference with communication. Team briefs are more regular, and
more structured. One on ones and daily walkabouts has made the gap between the Team
Leader and Posties smaller . . . The improvement in communication has meant that Posties
and other staff are more likely to seek support when needed. Management is more aware of the
needs of staff.
I think (GOAL) is more about the people management being accessible, being available to
your people and engaging with them all the time . . . and they know Im there to support them
and help them, not Im just there to crack the whip.
Branch management also reported that communication was transformed, with discussion
of performance (productivity and resourcing) now the norm on the shop floor. Managers
became enthusiastic communicators, for example, bringing in the people responsible for
round sizing to explain the system (no-one had ever had that conversation with them
before. They just knew they had to work at BS75). Both the branch managers interviewed
said that GOAL enabled them more time for business planning and for the development of
TLs rather than day-to-day operational management. The employee relations climate was
also described in positive terms. Managers have been able to address and resolve difficult
issues (such as bonus targets) constructively both through union channels and directly,
utilising focus groups of employees, and TLs said they were not so much consumed with
fire fighting as they would be in other large delivery sites.
Following the Marua Road pilot, GOAL was adopted in a more streamlined form
with less documentation and recording, and less intensive training in the set up period
and rolled out through the Auckland region. However, later interviews with the Marua
Road TLs suggest that though they still saw the initiative in positive terms, there were
Table 2. Postie survey results (%).
How does Marua compare with previous branches?
Communication
Teamwork
Development opportunities
Awareness of business results
Individual support
Access to team leader
As a place to work
Access to information
Same
Better
27
33
73
20
27
47
33
60
73
40
14
80
67
53
40
40
2707
some signs of frustration. This was because some of the people-management aspects of
their role were being crowded out by the effects of a national recruitment freeze and the
transfer of registered mail processing from the Couriers business to help replace declining
volume:
we really need someone doing that for all of us but theyre not going to pay for another
person so its really GOAL that suffers basically . . . its a shame because it definitely does
affect GOAL . . . GOALs a really good aspect you know, it really is but we need more
inside staff.
your time at the computer was meant to be an hour a day, out of your day and the rest of it was
really with your people and having the time to manage them properly and give them the time
that they needed to be as good as they could be as well. And thats kind of getting sucked away
from us which is unfortunate because we got to a really good point with the teams, the
dynamics of the team were great and the atmosphere was great. I dont think thats eroded but
were not probably putting as much effort into that as we were.
Discussion
This case study research has limitations, being based on a single initiative in one
organisation and more specifically focusing on one workplace. Several of the management
interviews also deal retrospectively with the issue. However, it responds to a significant
gap in the literature concerning how the HR function might perceive and address employee
engagement and how it deals with encountered difficulties. It also explores how the
initiative was experienced by the target employee group (the TLs) and also, less directly,
how this impacted on their reports. There are two main sets of issues arising from the
results that might inform a future research agenda.
First, what is the HR conception of EE and how does it go about developing and
implementing relevant initiatives? In this case, the initial problem was clearly identified in
terms of employee engagement, both by the trade union and by HRs own research into TL
attitudes and behaviours. The term itself was widely used by HR, but defined less in
precise psychosocial terms than in the broad sense of motivations that lead to desired
behaviours. It was also seen as a very important goal, partly as a humanistic end in itself
but most specifically because, in the AMO framework, it was seen to underpin the
various performance interventions (recruitment, training, work design and management
support) relating to ability and opportunity. The key practices introduced under GOAL
(e.g. providing a support worker for TLs) were designed to improve performance directly,
but crucially were seen to be responding to employee concerns around role motivation. In
this sense, the initiative is not an engagement initiative per se, but an engagement and
performance initiative since for HR both were inextricably linked.
This conceptual conflation of engagement and performance is also driven by a political
dimension. Selling proposals to senior line management required a hard focus on
productivity-related outcomes because however much HR might problematise the issue in
terms of engagement, the focus for the delivery business was performance numeric.
Hence, though HR clearly conceptualised (through the AMOD framework) and articulated
the importance of EE (including to the unions and employees as well as local and regional
management), this was less emphasised in the documents seeking senior business approval
for resources.
Second, what are the implications of EE for the HR function itself? The evidence from
this case at least is that HR requires high-level competencies if it is to design, sell and
implement significant change proposals relating to EE. The prerequisite is a thorough
2708
understanding of the business and the ability and confidence to generate ideas and take
responsibility for change management, which in turn implies an acceptance by different
management levels of its business partner status (Brockbank and Ulrich 2009). At the
same time, HR in this case came to adopt an incremental, evidence-based approach in
response to management caution and scepticism.
More fundamentally, the case suggests that effective engagement with engagement
means that HR assumes what Ulrich and Brockbank (2005) refer to as employee
advocacy. This is because it is concerned with identifying issues of concern to employees
what is frustrating them in their work and what improvements might be made and acting
upon them. In this initiative, HR emphasised employee voice and questioned existing work
arrangements to generate an integrated set of change proposals around areas such as work
design, skills development and leadership support. This approach represents something
different from both the classic pluralism of personnel management (as arbitrator) and the
conventional characterisation of HRM as essentially unitarist (management agent). The
hard-soft nature of HRs position on EE suggests something else, in that it seeks to
reconcile the business need to focus on performance outcomes with the acknowledgement
and representation of employee interests. In this sense, it might be seen as a form of what
Ackers (2002), referring more broadly to the disciplinary field of industrial relations, terms
neo-pluralism. The emphasis is on performance and mutual gains in terms of goals, not
simply in an avowedly managerialist way but by prioritising the recognition and addressing
of employee concerns.
Also relevant in this case is that HR worked in partnership with the trade unions in
pursuit of its goals. The initiative was to a significant degree prompted by EPMU
representations (with which the company has what HR referred to as a strategic
partnership) at national level, and HR worked hard to involve and reassure local union
representatives about the scheme. Exploring and comparing HR approaches to EE in nonunionised as well as unionised organisations would be a useful programme for future
research, mapping the nature of, and limits to, such neo-pluralism in less collectivised (and
perhaps commercially more aggressive) environments. This could extend recent research
into the nature and effectiveness of employee involvement through collective information
and consultation in different organisational settings (Hall, Hutchinson, Purcell, Terry and
Parker 2010).
A final consideration is the need for research on how far EE initiatives may be
considered strategic. There is a case, somewhat supported by this research, that EE
potentially operationalises SHRM along its three key dimensions. First, as Guest (1987)
originally observed, the strategic intent of HRM is defined by its focus on employee
performance and commitment. These were seen as self-reinforcing objectives in this case
and pursued through an integrated set of practices embracing new ways of working; new
recruitment and selection criteria to better match people to jobs; communication and
performance management; and training, development and succession planning. Second,
SHRM prioritises the recruitment and development of managers, recognising that they are
crucial to the everyday administration of the employment relationship and to the delivery of
HR practices (Hutchinson and Purcell 2003). As Alfes, Truss, Soane, Rees and Gatenby
conclude from their investigation of EE initiatives in eight UK organisations, HR needs to
pay close attention to the selection, development and performance management of line
managers to ensure they maximise their potential to be engaging leaders (2010, p. 3). TLs
were the focus of the GOAL initiative at NZ Post; it was recognised that TLs needed clear
role definition and support to be engaged, and that in turn they are more likely to effectively
lead their own teams when they themselves are provided with the required resources,
2709
development and leadership. Third, SHRM extends its interest in people management to
matters of work organisation (Boxall and Purcell 2008). At NZ Post, job redesign was a
fundamental component of the GOAL initiative.
Conclusions
Employee engagement has become a major focus for HR practitioners in recent years but,
whilst academic psychologists wrestle with its meaning and measurement, there has been
little investigation as to how HR might operationalise EE in practice, nor with what effect
(Welbourne 2011). This case study analyses one such initiative focused primarily on
supervisory employees. The GOAL project at NZ Post was designed to improve the
engagement and performance of TLs (and their reports) by providing them more support to
better discharge their people management responsibilities. The case raises a number of
implications. From a professional HR perspective, it suggests that the business partner
model might offer scope for HR to develop strategies around engagement geared towards
performance results. However, EE initiatives are likely to meet with scepticism or
opposition from business leaders, especially where they involve significant cost or change.
Workers too might not all be enthusiastic about job enlargement or more challenging work
where they are used to different ways of doing things. For HR, this places a premium on
effective marshalling of evidence. It also stresses the importance of HR basics, such as
better recruitment practices, in addition to development and support, to better match
workers and their managers to job roles.
More fundamentally, the case also responds to two common criticisms made of HRM.
The first is that it is based on simplistic and uncritical foundations. The second is that it is a
relatively powerless function, limited in its ability to lead change (Guest and King 2004).
Both perspectives are qualified to some degree in this case. First, the focus on employee
engagement and performance in the GOAL initiative proceeded through the application of
an analytical approach that acknowledged the problematic nature of the employment
relationship. Issues to do with job demands, resources and management style were
investigated using the AMOD framework and, moreover, involved a bottom-up process
of extensive consultation and research into what employees, as well as managers, thought
about their job. Indeed, as Sparrow and Balain (2010, p. 294) argue, effective engagement
strategies require HR to ask the harder questions. Why dont employees believe
management messages? Why are they frustrated in their work? Why is there not
supportive leadership? The HR goals of employee commitment and performance need not
preclude a critical and pluralistic understanding of work and management.
Second, though HR is fundamentally a dependent function virtually everything of
significance that it does has to be endorsed by and implemented through the line this
does not mean that it cannot act in a change agent capacity (Alfes, Truss and Gill 2010).
In this case, HR proceeded by building alliances with sympathetic business leaders and
using an evidence-based approach to win wider support within the senior management
team. It resembled an instance of what Storey (1992) labelled a changemaker role, or
what Legge (1978) termed deviant innovation, where the function is prepared to think
and act independently and, if necessary, challenge management assumptions and practice.
Both models, incidentally, were at that stage rarely observed in practice.
To end on a much more cautious note, the question remains as to the sustainability of
EE initiatives, especially in an increasingly challenging operating environment. The
GOAL initiative at NZ Post raised TL expectations that they would have the time and
administrative support to communicate with and manage their teams effectively, but this
2710
was subsequently undermined to some degree by resource constraints. The implication is

that, ultimately, EE is an ongoing process that commits HR to continuous interrogation of
the workplace. Unfortunately, the constraints on this are great and perhaps, as Hyman
observed, such labour strategies are generally destined to be routes to partial failure
(1987, p. 30). Yet, at the same time, EE does offer HR the potential to more systematically
engage with both its core constituencies in the pursuit of a more coherent contribution to
workplace motivation and performance.
Acknowledgements
Sincere thanks to Amanda Shantz and Katie Truss for constructive advice on positioning this paper,
and to the anonymous referees for their useful suggestions. We are also very grateful to the managers
and staff at NZ Post who gave their time and thoughts freely and who made this research possible.
References
Ackers, P. (2002), Reframing Employment Relations: The Case for Neo-Pluralism, Industrial
Relations Journal, 31, 1, 2 19.
Alfes, K., Truss, C., and Gill, J. (2010), The H.R. Manager as Change Agent: Evidence From the
Public Sector, Journal of Change Management, 10, 1, 109 127.
Alfes, K., Truss, C., Soane, E.C., Rees, C., and Gatenby, M. (2010), Creating an Engaged
Workforce, London: CIPD.
Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P., and Kalleberg, A.L. (2000), Manufacturing Advantage: Why
High-Performance Work Systems Pay Off, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Bakker, A.B., and Leiter, M.P., (eds.) (2010), Where to From Here: Integration and Future Research
on Work Engagement, in Work Engagement: A Handbook of Essential Theory and Research,
Hove: Psychology Press, pp. 181 196.
Blyton, P., Bacon, N., Fiorito, J., and Heery, E. (2008), The SAGE Handbook of Industrial Relations,
London: Sage.
Boxall, P., and Purcell, J. (2003), Strategy and Human Resource Management, New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Boxall, P., and Purcell, J. (2008), Strategy and Human Resource Management, London: Palgrave.
Boxall, P., Purcell, J., and Wright, P. (2008), The Oxford Handbook of Human Resource
Management, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brockbank, W., and Ulrich, D. (2009), HR Competencies That Make a Difference, in The
Routledge Companion to Strategic HRM, eds. J. Storey, P. Wright, and D. Ulrich,
Abingdon/New York: Routledge, pp. 167 181.
CIPD (2003), HR Survey: Where We Are, Where Were Heading, London: Author.
Clarke, J., and Newman, J. (1997), The Managerial State, London: Sage.
Craig, E., and Silverstone, Y. (2010), Tapping the Power of Collective Engagement, Strategic HR
Review, 9, 3, 5 10.
Daniels, K. (2011), Employee Engagement Factsheet, London: CIPD.
Delbridge, R., and Keenoy, T. (2010), Beyond Managerialism? International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 21, 6, 799 817.
Edwards, P.K. (1986), Conflict at Work, Oxford: Blackwell.
Elcano, M.S., Reisner, R.A.F., German, R.A., and Cernshaw, M.P. (2002), People and Privatization:
Human Resource Strategies in Postal Reform, in Postal and Delivery Services: Pricing,
Productivity, Regulation and Strategy, eds. M.A. Crew and P.R. Kleindorfer, Norwell, MA:
Kluwer, pp. 221245.
Emmott, M. (2010), Employee Engagement is a Strategic Issue, Strategic HR Review, 9, 3, 40 41.
Fox, A. (1974), Man Mismanagement, London: Hutchinson.
Godard, J., and Delaney, J.T. (2000), Reflections on the high Performance Paradigms
Implications for Industrial Relations as a Field, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 55, 3,
482 502.
Guest, D. (1987), HRM and Industrial Relations, Journal of Management Studies, 24, 5, 503521.
Guest, D. (1989), Personnel and HRM: Can you Tell the Difference? Personnel Management, 21,
1, 48 51.
2711
Guest, D., and Conway, N. (2004), Employee Well-Being and the Psychological Contract, London:
CIPD.
Guest, D.E., and King, Z. (2004), Power, Innovation and Problem-Solving: The Personnel
Managers Three Steps to Heaven? Journal of Management Studies, 41, 3, 401 423.
Hall, M., Hutchinson, S., Purcell, J., Terry, M., and Parker, J. (2010), Information and Consultation
under the ICE Regulations: Evidence from Longitudinal Case Studies. Employment Relations
Research Series no. 117, December, London: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, in
partnership with ACAS and the CIPD.
Hartley, J. (1994), Case Studies in Organizational Research, in Qualitative Methods in
Organizational Research: A Practical Guide, eds. C. Cassell and G. Symon, London: Sage,
pp. 208 229.
Hutchinson, S., and Purcell, J. (2003), Bringing Policies to Life: The Vital Role of Front Line
Managers in People Management, (Executive Briefing), London: CIPD.
Hyman, R. (1987), Strategy or Structure? Capital, Labour and Control, Work, Employment and
Society, 1, 1, 25 55.
Janssens, M., and Steyaert, C. (2009), HRM and Performance: A Plea for Reflexivity in HRM
Studies, Journal of Management Studies, 46, 143 155.
Jeung, C.W. (2011), The Concept of Employee Engagement: A Comprehensive Review from a
Positive Organizational Behavior Perspective, Performance Improvement Quarterly, 24, 2,
49 69.
JRA (John Roberts Associates) (2007), Employee Engagement Driving Organisational
Performance, Auckland: JRA.
Kahn, W.A. (1990), Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagement and Disengagement at
Work, Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692 724.
Keegan, A., and Francis, H. (2010), Practitioner Talk: The Changing Textscape of HRM and
Emergence of HR Business Partnership, International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 21, 6, 873 898.
Legge, K. (1978), Power, Innovation and Problem-Solving in Personnel Management, London:
McGraw-Hill.
Legge, K. (1995), Human Resource Management: Rhetoric and Realities, London: Macmillan.
Legge, K. (2007), Putting the Missing H Into HRM: The Case of the Flexible Organisation, in
Searching for the Human in Human Resource management: Theory, Practice and Workplace
Contexts, eds. S.C. Bolton and M. Houlihan, Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 115 136.
Macey, W.H., and Schneider, B. (2008), The Meaning of Employee Engagement, Industrial and
Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1, 3 30.
MacLeod, D., and Clarke, N. (2009), Engaging for Success: Enhancing Performance Through
Employee Engagement, London: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.
Maslach, C., and Leiter, M.P. (1997), The Truth About Burnout, San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
May, D.R., Gilson, R.L., and Harter, L.M. (2004), The Psychological Conditions of
Meaningfulness, Safety, Availability and the Engagement of the Human Spirit at Work,
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 11 37.
Mueller, F., and Carter, C. (2005), The HRM project and Managerialism: Or Why Some
Discourses are More Equal Than Others, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 18,
4, 369 382.
Nohria, N., Groysberg, B., and Lee, L.-E. (2008), Employee Motivation: A Powerful New Model,
Harvard Business Review, 86, 7 8, 78 84.
Pfeffer, J. (1998), The Human Equation: Building Profits by Putting People First, Boston, MA:
Harvard Business School Press.
Purcell, J. (2012), The Limits and Possibilities of Employee Engagement, Warwick Papers in
Industrial Relations, no. 96, Coventry: IRRU, University of Warwick.
Robertson-Smith, G., and Markwick, C. (2009), Employee Engagement: A Review of Current
Thinking, Report 469, Institute for Employment Studies, Brighton.
Robinson, D., Perryman, S., and Hayday, S. (2004), The Drivers of Employee Engagement,
Brighton: Institute for Employment Studies.
Roche, W.K., and Teague, P. (2013), Business Partners and Working the Pumps: Human Resource
Managers in the Recession, Human Relations, 65, 10, 1333 1358.
Saks, A.M. (2006), Antecedents and Consequences of Employee Engagement, Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 21, 7, 600 619.
2712
Schaufeli, W.B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma, V., and Bakker, A.B. (2002), The Measurement of
Burnout and Engagement: A Confirmatory Factor Analytic Approach, Journal of Happiness
Studies, 3, 71 92.
Schaufeli, W.B., and Bakker, A.B. (2010), Defining and Measuring Work Engagement: Bringing
Clarity to the Concept, in Work Engagement: A Handbook of Essential Theory and Research,
eds. A.B. Bakker and M.P. Leiter, New York: Psychology Press, pp. 10 24.
Sparrow, P., and Balain, S. (2010), HR Strategists: Do the Logics Match the Realitites? in
Handbook of Employee Engagement: Perspectives, Issues, Research and Practice, ed. S.L.
Albrecht, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 283 296.
Storey, J. (1992), Developments in the Management of Human Resources, Oxford: Blackwell.
Storey, J., (ed.) (2007), Human Resource Management: A Critical Text (3rd ed.), London: Thomson.
Storey, J., Ulrich, D., Welbourne, T.M., and Wright, P.M. (2009), Engagement, in The Routledge
Companion to Strategic Human Resource Management, eds. J. Storey, P.M. Wright, and D.
Ulrich, Abingdon/New York: Routledge, pp. 299316.
Toime, E. (1997), New Zealand Post - Creating a Benchmark Organization, Long Range Planning,
30, 1, 11 20.
Truss, C., Gratton, L., Hope-Hailey, V., McGovern, P., and Stiles, P. (1997), Soft and Hard Models
of Human Resource Management: A Reappraisal, Journal of Management Studies, 34, 1,
53 73.
Ulrich, D., and Brockbank, W. (2005), The HR Value Proposition, Boston, MA: Harvard Business
Press.
van Buren, H.J., Greenwood, M., and Sheehan, C. (2011), Strategic Human Resource Management
and the Decline of Employee Focus, Human Resource Management Review, 21, 3, 209 219.
Vickers, D., and Fox, S. (2010), Towards Practice-Based Studies of HRM: A Actor-Network and
Communities of Practice Informed Approach, International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 21, 6, 899 914.
Watson, T. (2004), HRM and Critical Social Science Analysis, Journal of Management Studies, 41,
3, 447 467.
Welbourne, T.M. (2011), Engaged in What? So What? A Role-Based Perspective for the Future of
Employee Engagement, in The Future of Employment Relations, eds. A. Wilkinson and K.
Townsend, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 85 100.
Wilkinson, A., Bacon, N., Redman, T., and Snell, S. (2010), SAGE Handbook of Human Resource
Management, London: Sage.
Wood, S. (1999), Human Resource Management and Performance, International Management
Review, 1, 367 413.
Wright, C. (2008), Reinventing Human Resource Management: Business Partners, Internal
Consultants and the Limits to Professionalization, Human Relations, 61, 8, 1063 1086.
Yin, R.K. (2009), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

The Meaning of Employee Engagement'

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Meaning of Employee Engagement'

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [Gadjah Mada University]

On: 21 December 2014, At: 04:03

The International Journal of Human

The meaning of employee engagement

J. Arrowsmith & J. Parker

School of Management, Massey University, Auckland, New

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 2013

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

School of Management, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand

*Corresponding author. Email: j.arrowsmith@massey.ac.nz

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

J. Arrowsmith and J. Parker

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

HRM and employee engagement

J. Arrowsmith and J. Parker

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

J. Arrowsmith and J. Parker

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

J. Arrowsmith and J. Parker

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

to participate (related to e.g. job discretion, team-working and direct involvement). At NZ

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

J. Arrowsmith and J. Parker

(based on the Lominger competency framework) delivered through a modular framework

Planning and business management

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

J. Arrowsmith and J. Parker

The Marua Road pilot

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

J. Arrowsmith and J. Parker

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

J. Arrowsmith and J. Parker

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

J. Arrowsmith and J. Parker

was subsequently undermined to some degree by resource constraints. The implication is

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

Downloaded by [Gadjah Mada University] at 04:03 21 December 2014

J. Arrowsmith and J. Parker

You might also like