Article
Workplace Spirituality and Employee Job Behaviour: An Empirical Investigation in Indian Manufacturing Organizations
Paradigm 20(2) 1–17 2016 IMT SAGE Publications sagepub.in/home.nav DOI: 10.1177/0971890716670721 http://par.sagepub.com
Rabindra Kumar Pradhan1 Lalatendu Kesari Jena2 Abstract Effective employee job behaviour is often driven by suitable work environment that continually provides a meaningful job assignment throughout one’s professional career. Recent researches in organizational studies have strengthened the notion of workplace spirituality for creating meaningful job, delight, contentment and hope at work that generate employee engagement, and organizational commitment. Such type of job behaviour is expected to produce better job performance of employees while deriving higher productivity of the organization. Keeping this in view, the present study was designed to examine the role of workplace spirituality in employee job behaviour through the construct of employee engagement and organizational commitment. The findings revealed that factors of workplace spirituality significantly and positively influence job behaviour dimensions. It also reported that workplace spirituality has significant effects on vigour and affective commitment. The meaningful work dimension of workplace spirituality was found to be significant predictors of employee engagement and organizational commitment. The study has a number of implications for academicians and human resource (HR) professionals for devising suitable mechanisms to create individual–organization fitment interventions. Keywords Meaningfulness, workplace spirituality, employee engagement, organizational commitment, manufacturing organization, India
1 2
Associate Professor, Dept. of Humanities and Social Science, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India. Doctoral Scholar, Dept. of Humanities and Social Science, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India.
Corresponding author: Rabindra Kumar Pradhan, Associate Professor, Dept. of Humanities and Social Science Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India. E-mail:
[email protected]
2
Paradigm 20(2)
Introduction In today’s ever-changing business scenario, retention of human resource (HR) and to keep them committed incessantly throughout their professional career stands as a fundamental challenge. To be successful in the current competitive business world, organizations are expected to nurture a sense of dedication and ownership among professionals to face market competitions and achieve organizational goals from time to time (Dessler, 1999). Therefore, building an engaged and committed workforce was found to have a strong impact on organization’s performance in terms of generating team productivity, fostering healthy co-worker relationship and deriving job satisfaction (Catteeuw, Flynn, & Vonderhorst, 2007). Empirical evidences on the factors such as changing work environment, employment laws, downsizing and wage discrimination across industries have shown a decreased trend of employee engagement and commitment level as it builds a negative influence on organizational productivity and consequently threatens the sustainability of the establishment (David, Scott, Nancy, & Michelle, 2005; Wheeler, Halbesleben, & Harris, 2012). Workplace spirituality in this context aligns individual and team roles with the organizational goals and strives to create a fulfiling relationship not only between employer and employees, but also among the co-workers (Tim, Aylin, Carlis, & Ian, 2015). With the development of knowledge economy, this kind of thinking prompts for integrating organizational spiritual values with its ‘human capital’. Capital in this context is primarily referred for maximizing ‘human productivity’ through providing meaningful profile to a professional and instilling the passion to perform by assigning them with challenging assignments right from the time of employment. The concept of employee engagement emerges when an employer influences its employees through providing them with a meaningful job, a safe environment to work and like-minded colleagues around them. Therefore, an effective employee job behaviour is possible when the organization is able to create a work environment that provides a meaningful job assignment, holds them with an emotional bond and instils a sense of commitment throughout their professional career span. However, much of the research carried out on the construct of workplace spirituality tends to be anecdotal and conceptual in nature, with little empirical evidence suggesting that organizations encouraging spirituality in their portfolio are more profitable and have created a better place to work (Moxley, 2000). Keeping the argument and aforesaid research gap into context, we have tried to explore the empirical linkage of the dimensions of workplace spirituality with two important constructs that is the dimensions of employee engagement and organizational commitment in Indian manufacturing organizations.
Workplace Spirituality The continual search for couple of decades to derive a shared understanding on the construct of spirituality and its benefit at workplace has stimulated researchers and practitioners to differentiate the legitimacy of separating spiritual development at workplace from one’s religious orientation (Harrington, 2004). In contemporary times, there is a kind of revolution happening in workplace to blend the concept of spirituality in organizational value system. This is because majority of employed professionals are found to be seeking inner peace, meaningful work, collaborative atmosphere with one’s peers and colleagues than just accumulating a bulky pay packet from their organizations. Zinnbauer, Pargament and Scott (1999) has stated that employees who view their work as a sacred vocation are likely to approach their role quite differently from employees who see their work as a means to pay bill. In the post globalized era, the need for introducing spiritual connection at workplace has become important because of an ongoing upheaval in organizational structure, which often results in individual employee’s feeling of insecurity regarding one’s job in the organizational system (Giacalone &
Pradhan and Jena
3
Jurkiewicz, 2003). The recent spur of scholarly articles in industrial psychology are focused on harmonizing work and spirituality connection which warrants for exploring the psychological variables and its possible empirical linkages for deriving job satisfaction and workplace well-being (Connolly & Myers, 2003; Milliman, Czaplewski, & Ferguson, 2003). It is to iterate the fact that, the business unit that engages the hearts and minds of their people are able to incubate the desired element of spirituality in their everyday working environment. Therefore, it is said that companies that focus on processes that include the spiritual element, such as bringing together employees for motivation at work and encouraging them to find meaning in their work profile, may be able to increase employee commitment and retention in the long run (McLaughlin, 1998). Workplace spirituality is viewed as an approach of person–organization fit (P–O fit), which refers to the ‘congruence between an employee’s personal value with an organization’s culture’ (Cable & De Rue, 2002). Their research finding has advocated that when a worker creates a strong bond with workplace through aligning his or her value and belief pattern; then better work outcomes may potentially result. Therefore, it can be presumed that when there is a strong match between a professional’s values with organizational mission and strategies, more positive attitudinal outcomes and better job productivity may flourish. It is said that when an organization is able to practise the spiritual values such as providing meaning and purpose to one’s work, create a system of openness in its work culture, and emphasize on personal development and growth of their employees, it will be able to tag themselves as ‘spiritually tuned organizations’ (Harrington, Preziosi, & Gooden, 2001; Simpson, 2009; Smidts, Pruyn, & VanRiel, 2001). Another important agenda of workplace spirituality is linked with people sharing and experiencing some common attachment, attraction and togetherness within their work unit and the organization as a whole (Harrington, 2004). Earlier research has evinced the fact that togetherness and socialization at workplace matters a lot for an employee to continue further and contribute the best for the organization (Lillard & Ogaki, 2005). A favourable work atmosphere engages an individual to act in a committed manner for materializing the organizational goals. Milliman et al. (2003) specified the construct of workplace spirituality into three important levels and those are: individual level in terms of meaning in work, group level in terms of sense of community and organizational level in terms of alignment with organizational values. Mitroff and Denton (1999) have stated that ‘if a single word best captures the meaning of spirituality and the vital role that it plays in people’s lives, that word is interconnectedness’. This is because a sense of connectedness promotes awareness of the needs of others and may result in things like compassion and a desire for justice for organization. Furthermore, it is perceived that a culture of sharing and caring will eventually reach all stakeholders of the organization creating a situation of win-win. Taking the cognizance of such findings, we have presumed that the dimensions of workplace spirituality play as an important ingredient in the hands of management for promoting engagement and commitment of employees to achieve the overall objective of the organization.
Employee Engagement The key to employee engagement is to construct greater motivation for work and a wholehearted commitment towards one’s organization. In one of the surveys conducted by Great Place to Work Institute (2003), a senior HR functionary of a successful MNC said, ‘It is not possible to retain professionals only by paying high salaries and attractive benefits. We need to create enthusiasm for their roles, their work environment and the organization, and ensure that they are well integrated in the system as a whole.’ It is believed that engaged employees who are equipped with right tools, managed by right systems and
4
Paradigm 20(2)
processes and get supported through proper mentoring, are able to deliver superior performance (Gruman & Saks, 2011). Therefore, the order for the day calls for loyal, engaged employees who are intellectually and emotionally bound to the organizations’ and take up its goals as their own (Guthrie, 2001). Keeping this perspective into account, we have started exploring what exactly is employee engagement and why is it so crucial for the success of an organization. Macey and Schneider (2008) defined employee engagement as composing of two dimensions: (a) the values and expectations of the employees and (b) the ability of the employer towards creating an environment that are conducive for one’s career growth. An engaged employee is someone who feels empowered, gets involved and demonstrates those feeling in work behaviour in the form of commitment to one’s job assignment. Employee engagement can be considered as a trait (something that is characteristic of an employee’s personality), a state (a condition that an employee is in for some period of time) and a behaviour that an employee demonstrates, for example, challenging the status quo, being innovative or just being a good organization citizen (Macey & Schneider, 2008). Organizations those are realizing the benefits for treating the whole person through promoting meaningful growth, bridging faith and confidence in their ability are able to foster workplace spirituality. During our study with manufacturing industries, we have found that the working condition of the organization plays a major role in influencing the behaviour of its employees and consequently their engagement patterns. For example, some employees get motivated with financial incentives while others expect recognition and a handful of them gets motivated with challenging assignments. Some professionals are found to be committed to their job assignments and would do their best for the organization, whereas there are a set of few professionals, who will do just enough in their job to avoid any adverse report or disciplinary action against them (Jena & Pradhan, 2014). As mentioned above, there are a set of employees who are punctual, available full time, well mannered even with having necessary potential to perform, but sadly one can find that their energy is utilized for ‘other than work’. Therefore, the challenge for such organizations is to make a conscious effort towards engaging all their employees through their HR policies, organizational values, leadership behaviour and above all, organizational culture (Frank, Finnegan, & Taylor, 2004). Our understanding goes at this point of time that if an employee does not feel engaged, it is not only a reflection on one’s desires and competencies; rather it is also a kind of environmental influence in which one is made to work (Jena & Pradhan, 2014). Earlier research findings bear testimony to the fact that those employees who find their work to be challenging tend to possess a high degree of engagement at the workplace (Gruman & Saks, 2011; Wheeler et al., 2012). In a stimulating work environment where there is meaningfulness and companionship, professionals derive a clear understanding about their roles and perceive the work assignment as an opportunity for self-expression and growth. In other words, employee engagement involves one’s understanding about organizations’ vision vis-à-vis their individual contribution. Engagement inspires a desire to perform well in one’s job that is considered to be interesting which is coupled with a belief that the employer cares about their needs and they are well supported by the organizational policies and procedures for their growth and well-being (Gubman, 2004). Therefore, fitment of temperament between employees and management implies a positive engagement with organizational goals. Engaged employees are the ones who constantly do their best, continue to be loyal to the company, be campaigners of the organizational mission and its products, contribute to the bottom line of the company success through motivation, individual work accountability and enhanced performance (Wheeler et al., 2012). Therefore, it is understood that employee engagement is a vital dimension to any business organization that seeks not only to retain its esteemed employees, but also to increase their performance levels. The sense of selfresponsibility is found to be instilling a sense of ownership in employee’s mind and with this they may be able to feel that they actually own the job and get accountable for each and every decision they make for their organization.
Pradhan and Jena
5
Organizational Commitment The concept of ‘commitment’ has attracted a great deal of attention in recent years because it is an intangible psychological resource that can neither be replicated nor purchased by a competitor. Though the success of an organization depends on the competitiveness of its product offerings, however it cannot deliver value to its customers unless every employee in its portfolio is able to exhibit a high level of commitment towards realizing its strategic objectives. It is said that a motivated, well-trained and committed workforce is needed for success and sustenance of the organization. Organizational commitment indicates a psychological congruence of a professional to identify, involve and get connected with the goals of an organization. There are three distinct approaches for defining commitment. The exchange approach view of commitment states an outcome of inducement or contribution transactions between the organization and its members (Buchanan, 1974). The psychological approach postulated by Porter, Steers, Mowday and Boulin (1974) defined commitment as an attitude or an orientation towards the organization which links or attaches the identity of the individual professional with its organization. The psychological approach has been reconceptualized by Reichers (1985) stating it as attribution approach defining commitment as a binding force between a professional to their respective behavioural acts and it occurs after engaging in behaviours that are explicit and irrecoverable. A committed workforce has a low intention to quit with a sense of obligation to perform. There is substantial research evidence indicating that employers can favourably influence through taking the queues from such approaches for creating a work environment which has indicated by action, that the employee is a valued member (Eisenberger, Armeli, Rexwinkel, Lynch, & Rhoades, 2001). In this connection, some of the studies have explored that though pay and perks are one part of it, however employers need to address fairness, quality of supervision and support for employees to successfully achieve a committed workforce. Highly committed employees influence the organization’s position in the marketplace, so also the success of its strategies for generating the shareholder’s value of an organization. In this context, Mowday, Steers and Porter (1979) defined commitment as relative intensity of employees’ involvement in, and identification with a specific organization. From their definition, we can deduce the characterization of organizational commitment as it is influenced by three important factors: (a) having a belief and acceptance of the values and goals of the organization, (b) desire to continue the organizational membership throughout one’s professional career and, most importantly, (c) willingness to realize the organizational vision and goal. This kind of self-offering to the cause of the profession entails for using time constructively, keeping attention to details of the job, putting extra effort to collaborate and learn, appreciate and accept change, cooperate with others and finally giving loyal and unflinching support (Yakın & Erdil, 2012). The growing popularity of the construct has been viewed as ‘encapsulating the wholesome requirement of a professional’s role while at work’ (Charles & Wang, 2006). One of the most-cited models of organizational commitment was developed by Meyer and Allen (1991). They have differentiated commitment into three important components: affective (e.g., emotional attachment to the organization), continuance (e.g., perceived costs associated with leaving the organization) and normative (e.g., feelings of obligation towards the organization). Rego and Cunha (2008) stated in this context that each of these components contributes for strengthening the likelihood that the employee will continue with the organization for a considerable period of time. However, in this flourishing business world the nature of each individual mind-set differs from others as it was evident among today’s workers. Employees with a strong affective commitment remain because they want to do so. Those with strong continuance commitment stay because they feel they have to. Whereas, the normatively committed employees remain because they feel they ought to.
6
Paradigm 20(2)
Commitment is defined as a psychological attachment of oneself with the organization and it is predicted through three important constructs, that is, compliance, identification and internalization (O’Reilly & Chatman, 1986). Compliance is defined as one’s involvement for deriving an extrinsic reward for the professional efforts. Identification is about attachment with organization because of one’s intrinsic desire for affiliation, whereas internalization is based on an employee’s wholehearted acceptance to be a part of organization’s mission and value. Various researchers have proved empirically that commitment in the form of internalization has played a major role in enhancing organizational productivity (Meyer, Irving, & Allen, 1998) and generating shareholders’ value (Biljana, 2004) of an organization. Madigan, Norton and Testa (1999) in their study have confirmed that committed employees work diligently and conscientiously through promoting the organizations’ services/products. However, in exchange, it has been observed that they do expect a work environment which can foster growth and empowerment allowing for a better balance of personal and work life (Madigan et al., 1999). Finally, when employees feel that the organization is promoting one’s hope, aspirations and happiness (Eisenberger et al., 2001), they tend to reciprocate with positive commitment towards the organization which embraces a sense of loyalty and dedication.
Research Gap It is apprehended from literature review, that organizations catering the skilled workforce influence employee engagement and commitment by working on the dimensions of workplace spirituality. At the same time, there is a lack of empirical research that investigates the relationships between employee perceptions on HRD practises especially, employee engagement and other organizational outcomes (Mallick, Pradhan, Tewari, & Jena, 2015; Rurkkhum & Bartlett, 2012). We have presumed that the dimensions of workplace spirituality may prove to be useful to make people engaged and committed towards realizing the organizational vision and objective. Therefore, the present study has been designed to investigate the relationship between the dimensions of workplace spirituality and employee engagement and organizational commitment. The purpose is to discuss the consequent impact of such practises on organizational productivity and employee motivation.
Objective of the Study Based on the review of literature and research gap analysis, the objective of the present study was developed to examine the influence of workplace spirituality on employee job behaviour such as employee engagement and organizational commitment.
Development of Hypotheses Employee Engagement and Workplace Spirituality There is a growing interest among scholars and practitioners on workplace spirituality and employee engagement. Even though both the topics focus on the importance of the ‘spirit at work’, they have emerged independent of each other with little attention on their interrelationships (Kahn, 1990;
Pradhan and Jena
7
Sacks, 2011). It is understood that, when a professional gets engaged in a job he is not only investing his hands and head, but also his heart to the entrusted profile (Rich, Lepine, & Crawford, 2010) because he feels that exerting a wholesome effort provides a kind of psychological satisfaction for performing an organizational role (Kahn, 1992). In this context, May, Gilson and Harter (2004) have defined human spirit as an inner conscience which is seeking for fulfilment and one way out is materialized through self-expression at work. They have stated that ‘we believe for the human spirit to thrive at work which happens through completely immersing self into one’s assigned role. That is, one must be able to engage the cognitive, emotional, and physical dimensions to work.’ Hence, it is presumed that when one’s love and belonging to work supports the objective and goals of the organization, the overlap may yield extraordinary results. Therefore, we can come to an understanding that spirituality at workplace and engagement denotes a sense of completeness or wholeness in a work set-up. Krishnakumar and Neck (2002) have opined in their findings that ‘Spirituality is recognized as one of the crucial dimensions of the human personality. If an organization is encouraging spirituality, then it is actually boosting its employees to bring their complete self to work.’ Engagement provides employees necessary thrust to get absorbed with the role they are performing whereas, spirituality being authentic at work brings an association with the construct of engagement. Engagement instils a kind of passion to be a part of meaningful work. The coexistence of both the term predicts that organizations embracing spirituality in the workplace might facilitate employees to fully engage themselves in their respective work roles. Therefore, there is a call for an empirical introspection between the dimensions of workplace spirituality and employee engagement. Thus, the first hypothesis of the study is: Hypothesis 1: Workplace spirituality will be positively related to employee engagement.
Employee Commitment and Workplace Spirituality Employees who are engaged are more likely to continue and stay committed to their organization (Bakker, Demerouti, & Brummelhuis, 2012; DeClercqet, Dimov, & Thongpapanl, 2010; Karatepe & Olugbade, 2009). Commitment is a kind of willingness to invest oneself and expand one’s discretionary effort to help the employer for succeeding in competitive environment (Yakın & Erdil, 2012). Committed employees own responsibilities, projects higher reliability and are less likely to be absent from the job. A spiritual atmosphere in this connection promotes humanistic values like faith and happiness (Eisenberger et al., 2001) and in turn derives affective commitment and a sense of trustworthiness among its employees. An opportunity to get meaningful work assignment boosts employees’ self-esteem and personal growth. Gavin and Mason (2004) in their study stated that alignment of one’s skill with expected organizational role brings an emotional and spiritual connectedness in an employee assuming ‘work as a mission than as a job’. This kind of attachment makes employees to become committed to organizational goals and materializing its goals and objectives. Khanifar, Jandaghi and Samereh (2010) indicated in their study that an increasing organizational commitment is attributed to a sense of personal enrichment through doing meaningful work assignment in one’s job. Therefore, it is reasonable to state that to achieve competitive advantage, organizations need to steer its HR functionaries to set up a spiritual road map in their policies and practices for achieving employee commitment. Hence, the concomitant justifications on dimensions of workplace spirituality and organizational commitment lead to the construction of our second hypothesis of this study as: Hypothesis 2: Workplace spirituality will be positively related to organizational commitment.
8
Paradigm 20(2)
Methods Measurement Tools A set of standardized tools were used for data collection on workplace spirituality, employee engagement and organizational commitment. All these tools are presented in form of questionnaires to sample participants for exercising their options. Each questionnaire consists of statements and is answered on Likert’s five-point rating scales: (a) strongly disagree, (b) disagree, (c) neither agree nor disagree, (d) agree and (e) strongly agree. Workplace Spirituality (WS) Scale. The scale was established by Ashmos and Duchon (2000) consisting of 21 items. The components like meaningful work contains 6 items (e.g., I understand what gives my work personal meaning), sense of community composes of 7 items (e.g., I think employees are linked with a common purpose) and alignment with organizational values contains 8 items (e.g., I feel connected with the mission of the organization). Employee Engagement (EE) Scale. The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale developed by Schaufeli, Salanova, Gonzalez-Roma and Bakker (2002) consists of 17 items on the three underlying dimensions, that is, of vigour, dedication and absorption. ‘Vigour’ is measured with six items and proposes statements on willingness to invest effort for representing high levels of energy and resilience at work. The second dimension on ‘dedication’ composes of five items which measures the experience of enthusiasm, pride, inspiration and challenge relative to one’s work. The third dimension ‘absorption’ is having six items and includes statements such as ‘my job inspires me’ and ‘I feel happy when I am working intensely’. Organizational Commitment (OC) Scale. The 24-item scale measures affective, normative and continuance commitment dimensions and is proposed by Allen and Meyer (1990). Examples of the sample items are: ‘I really feel as if this organization’s problems are my own’ (affective commitment), ‘One of the major reasons I continue to work for this organization is that leaving would require considerable personal sacrifice—another organization may not match the overall benefits I have here’ (continuance commitment) and ‘I was taught to believe in the value of remaining loyal to one’s organization’ (normative commitment).
Pilot Study An initial study was made to establish the appropriateness and rationality of the items used for our study. The instruments were tested using a predetermined sample of 52 respondents drawn from local organizations engaged in manufacturing and production engineering services. The reliability values on 21-items workplace spirituality scale is found to be 0.87, 17-items work-engagement scale is 0.83 and 24-item organizational commitment scale is 0.86. As per the recommendation of Nunnally (1978), all the reliability values of the instruments were found meeting the required threshold.
Participants and Procedures The population for the final survey has been drawn through purposive sampling and there was no deliberate bias in identifying the sample respondents. The author researchers have visited the manufacturing public sector industries of eastern Indian subcontinent and approached the employees and executives through their respective HR heads to undertake the survey. In total, 212 questionnaires were
9
Pradhan and Jena Table 1. Summary of Factors, Abbreviations and Reliability of the Instruments (n = 172) Abbreviations
No. of Items
Cronbach’s Alpha ( )
Meaningful Work
MW
6
0.86
Sense of Community
SOC
7
0.92
Alignment with Organizational Values
ALV
8
0.91
Concepts
Factors
Workplace Spirituality (WS)
Employee Engagement (EE) Organizational Commitment (OC)
Vigour
VI
6
0.87
Dedication
DE
5
0.89
Absorption
AB
6
0.87
Affective Commitment
AC
8
0.86
Normative Commitment
NC
8
0.88
Continuance Commitment
CC
8
0.87
Source: Authors’ findings.
distributed to respondents who are working full time as executives in their present organizations. The identified sample respondents have been instructed that the present survey was being carried out primarily for academic purpose, and therefore the information and opinion collected from them would be kept confidential. Key demographic variables (gender and age) were reviewed for further characterizing the sample. Out of 212 questionnaires, 172 filled in questionnaires were returned, with a response rate of 81.13 per cent, and all of which were deployed for further data analysis. The high response rate can be attributed to the effective administration of these surveys. The sample respondent consists of 32.55 per cent female executives and 29.65 per cent of the total respondents had worked for more than five years in their present establishments. The mean age of the participants was 32.76 years (SD = 4.64) with the majority of them (68.6 per cent) married and regarding the educational level, 68.6 per cent of them had professional postgraduate level studies leading to CA, ICWAI, CFA and MBA level qualifications, and 31.79 per cent had graduate level professional studies in engineering and technology disciplines.
Results Responses elicited from the sample were averaged to yield composite scores of each scale from total valid responses for further statistical analysis. A summary of all the scales are presented in Table 1, showing (a) the dimensions of the constructs used in the study, (b) abbreviations and the number of items constituting the factors and (c) the Cronbach’s alpha coefficients indicating the internal consistency of workplace spirituality (WS), employee engagement (EE) and organizational commitment (OC) scales.
Correlation and Regression Findings The descriptive statistics and correlation matrix are displayed in Table 2. The table of zero-order correlation shows that among the dimensions of workplace spirituality, sense of community (SOC) &
3.96
4.15
4.14
4.17
4.16
4.12
4.16
4.17
4.15
WSS
VI
DE
AB
EES
AC
CC
NC
OCS
SD
0.46
0.64
0.55
0.49
0.47
0.64
0.56
0.48
0.23
0.33
0.39
0.52
0.89**
0.91**
0.77**
0.46**
0.89**
0.94**
0.46**
0.83**
0.67**
–0.08
–0.06
1
MW
–0.07
–0.07
–0.12
0.01
–0.05
–0.06
0.01
–0.08
0.53**
0.02
1
SOC
0.02
–0.16*
–0.03
0.31**
0.10
–0.14
0.33**
0.11
0.42**
1
AOV
0.63**
0.56**
0.49**
0.49**
0.68**
0.59**
0.51**
0.62**
1
WSS
0.90**
0.76**
0.92**
0.52**
0.90**
0.77**
0.53**
1
VI
0.63**
0.33**
0.35**
0.94**
0.74**
0.36**
1
DE
0.87**
0.97**
0.73**
0.37**
0.86**
1
AB
0.95**
0.83**
0.79**
0.72**
1
EES
0.67**
0.38**
0.35**
1
AC
0.87**
0.75**
1
CC
0.89**
1
NC
1
OCS
Source: Authors’ findings. Note: MW-Meaningful work; SOC-Sense of community; ALV-Alignment of values; WSS-Workplace spirituality scale; VI-Vigour; DE-Dedication; AB-Absorption; EESEmployee engagement scale; AC-Affective commitment; CC-Continuance commitment; NC-Normative commitment, OCS-Organizational commitment scale
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
3.66
4.01
SOC
4.20
ALV
Mean
Variables
MW
Table 2. Inter Dimension Correlations of Workplace Spirituality, Employee Engagement and Organizational Commitment (N = 172)
Pradhan and Jena
11
Alignment of organizational values (ALV) are negatively correlated with meaningful work (MW). Whereas, the composite score of workplace spirituality (WS) is found to be positively correlated with both meaningful work (r = 0.67, p
