THE IMPACT OF PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT ON EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT: A STUDY OF EXECUTIVE LEVEL EMPLOYEES IN CAMSO LOADSTAR (PVT) LTD M.L.H. Dhananjani Department of Human Resource Management Faculty of commerce and Management Studies University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka. Email: hansikadhananjani@gmail.com Prof. (Ms) P. Gamage Professor in Department of Human Resource Management Faculty of commerce and Management Studies University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka Email: prasadinigamage@yahoo.com ABSTRACT The main purpose of this study was to identify the impact of psychological empowerment on employee engagement. Further the current research identifies the relationship of psychological empowerment on employee engagement and also the impact for the four dimensions of the independent variable on the dependent variable were measured separately in order to have a better understanding of the situation. This was carried out as a cross sectional study among a sample of 63 executive level employees selected from a population of 75 executives at Camso Loadstrar (Pvt) Ltd, which is the largest solid tyre manufacturer in the world. A standard widely used and self – administered questionnaire was used to collect primary data through a survey. After determining the sample size based on the sampling size calculation table of Krejcie & Morgan (1970), random sampling was applied to distribute the questionnaires to the sample of 63 among the population of 75 executives. To analyze data gathered SPSS 23 (Statistical Package for the Social Science) was used. To interpret the data which analyzed, the researcher presented the results using the descriptive statistics, correlation coefficient and simple regression analysis. Statistical results revealed that there is a significant impact of psychological empowerment on employee engagement of the executive level employees. Findings revealed that out of the four dimensions (meaning, competence, self-determination and impact) only two dimensions of psychological empowerment, namely competence and impact have a significant influence on the dependent variable, employee engagement. Cross validation of the findings of this study to be done in different industries and different cultures comparatively among a bigger sample in subsequent studies is recommended, which will add more insights to the substance of the present study. Keywords: Psychological empowerment, Employee engagement, Meaning, Competence, Self-determination, Impact Introduction To be the best in the competitive world of business, organizations are continuously developing technologies and operational processes. Rapidly changing and challenging business environment force organizations to review management systems in order to remain competitive in today’s turbulent economy. According to the idea of Ndlovu & Parumasur, 2005 organizations are having a huge pressure to upgrade their performance and increase their competitiveness in the continuously changing world of work. To perform well in such a turbulent environment competitively they need various resources. To manage organizations effectively and efficiently the most valuable and crucial factor that the organizations need is its human resource. Accordingly the major sources of competitive advantage will lie not only in technological advancements but with engaged, committed and competent workforce. Firms are considered to be competitive on the basis of competency of their human resources in this modern era, where world has become a global village. It is somewhat a difficult task to handle people who are physically, psychologically, culturally and ethnically different from each other. In order to be success in the business world cognitive ability and the creativity of the human capital should be grabbed up to its maximum level. In today’s context most of the employees within organizations are not only thinking of the financial benefits they could get, but about the importance or the value that the organization place on them. On that platform the employees can be motivated through non-financial motivating factors rather than giving financial benefits. When considering the non-financial motivating factors, empower employees psychologically is relatively a new concept that the organizations can be used to increase the level of employee engagement. Employee Engagement: Choo, Mat & Omari (2013) cited the definition from Kahn (1990) and mentioned that employee engagement is initially defined as “harnessing of organizational members’ selves to their work roles in engagement, people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively and emotionally during role performances”. Evolution of the definitions and the concept of employee engagement will be discussed in detailed manner in chapter two, literature review. According to Shuck, Marie Valentin, Celestino Valentin & Nafukho (2015) cited evidence from Shuck & Wollard (2009) and mentioned that employee engagement has become very popular in the field of human resource management more recently human resource development, irrespective of being presented in the practitioner community and further cited evidence from Shuck & Herd (2012) and stated that building employee engagement is a challenge for the management and top priority for many organizations. Further Marie Valentin, Celestino Valentin & Nafukho (2015) cited evidence from Albrecht (2010) and stated that the concept of employee engagement has generated enormous interest in both domains of academics and practitioners. Importance of employee engagement has been recognized in various angles, including a major report on employee engagement recently commissioned by the UK government’s department of Business Innovation and Skills (MacLeod & Clarke (2009) as cited in Tinline & Crowe, (2010)). As mentioned by Tinline & Crove (2010) improving employee engagement is a challenge that most of the organizations identified as critical to the companies’ performance and reputation. This idea of Tinline & Crove (2010) strengthen MacLeod & Clarke’s idea. Most of the research evidences link employee engagement with performance and other important organizational outcomes has created a widespread belief among senior executives and human resource practitioners that improving and sustaining high levels of employee engagement is good for business (Attridge (2009) as cited in Ivan Robertson, Jansen Birch & Cooper (2012)). Psychological Empowerment: The study of empowerment was first developed by Hackman and Oldham using the motivational frameworks model: Test of a theory. Empowerment in the workplace is often a misunderstood concept. Employee empowerment is a term that many managers and organizations think they understand and properly practicing, but few actually do, and even fewer really put in to practice. The concept of empowerment act as a drive to gain organizational effectiveness through the wise utilization of human resources as mentioned by Siegall & Gardner, 2000. There are two constructs in empowerment namely structural and psychological. The psychological perspective of empowerment moves away from the traditional study of management practices and instead highlight employees’ perceptions and experiences of empowerment. According to the previous research articles on psychological empowerment, there are four main components. Namely meaningfulness, competence, self-determination, and impact. As stated by Siegall & Gardner in 2000, the organizations which are more relying on team based designs, empowerment becomes important at both individual and team levels. When the employees see themselves as competent individuals and believing that they can influence on their jobs in meaningful ways, psychological empowerment is linked to the effectiveness of both individuals and organization (Spreitzer (1995) as cited in Solansky (2014)). Similarly Meyerson & Kline, 2008 stated that psychological empowerment relates to how competent or capable employees within organizations feel in a working environment which has an empowered work culture. As per his idea empowered employees feel more satisfied with their work, willingly committed towards the success of the organization, have lower intentions to leave the organization and also exhibit more positive work behaviors than the employees who are not psychologically empowered. Even though many researchers shown the positive side of psychological empowerment Marc Siegall & Susan Gardner, 2000 mentioned that empowerment programs are not always recognized as effective by taking evidences from Griggs & Manring, 1991; Thorlakson & Murray, (1996). Introduction to the Organization The organization concerned for present study is Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd is the largest manufacturer of Solid tyres in the world who has the vision of having the global leadership in tires and tracks by meeting the mobility needs of the off-the-road vehicle market through lowest cost of ownership. Apart from that they produce pneumatic tyres, steel rims and rubber tracks. The company was established in 1984 as a joint venture between Jinasena group of companies and their Belgian partner Solideal Ltd. The Sri Lankan company currently comprises 11 factories and 2 training centers, employing over 6,000 Shop flow employees. The current study is focusing on the executive level employees who are employing at Camso Loadstrar (Pvt) Ltd and for the data collection purposes the current researcher consider only 9 factories that belongs to Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd which are located within the Ja-Ela area. Camso Loadstar Pvt (Ltd) is a BOI (Board of Investment – Sri Lanka) approved company which production has done only Sri Lanka. But very recently company started its producion in Vietnam. As mentioned in the company website the selected organization is sending out a strong message that they are one team, dedicated to bring a world class brand manufacturer and service provider of performance of products to meet all customers’ off the road vehicle needs. The company presently holds 11% of the global off the road market and contributes to over 3.5% of Sri Lankan exports. Very recently the company received five awards at the “Presidential Export Awards 2016”. One such achievement that the company received was the best Sri Lankan multinational company who is in to the exports. Mainly the company has four main values. Namely empowerment, commitment, teamwork and integrity. The current researcher is focusing how psychological side of the value empowerment, impact on the level of engagement of the executive level employees. Problem Statement Various types of researches have been taken place on psychological empowerment and employee engagement from different angles over past years. Previous research testified that engaged employees tend to produce positive organizational outcomes including increased customer satisfaction, enhanced productivity, lower turnover intention (Harter et al., 2002) and increased in role and extra role behavior (Schaufeli et al.,2006). Solansky (2014) cited evidence from Spreiter (1995) and mentioned that psychological empowerment is a critical concept for both practitioners and researchers and merits continuous examination. Having considered the situation discussed above, the main problem statement and the research questions of the current study was raised as follows. Assessing the impact of psychological empowerment on employee engagement of executive level employees at Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. What is the impact of psychological empowerment on employee engagement? What is the relationship between psychological empowerment and employee engagement? To what extent the company has empowered their executive level employees psychologically? What is the level of employee engagement of executive level employees? Objectives The prime purpose of this research study is to assess the impact of psychological empowerment on employee engagement of executive level employees who are currently working in Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. Moreover, following secondary objectives were established to facilitate the achievement of the prime purpose. To measure the relationship between psychological empowerment and employee engagement. To investigate extent to which the organization is empowering their executive employees psychologically. To measure the level of employee engagement of executive and above employees. Literature Survey Employee Engagement Having an engaged workforce is a critical factor to obtain various favorable organizational outcomes. Many researchers defined employee engagement, highlighted the factors of employee engagement and illustrate the consequences of employee engagement from multiple angles. Choo, Mat & Omari (2013) cited evidence from Khan (1990) and mentioned that for the first time the concept of employee engagement is identified by Khan, 1990 and he has defined employee engagement in a detailed manner as “the harnessing of organization members’ selves to their work roles; people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally during the performance”. According to Schaufeli & Bakker, 2001 “Engagement is a positive fulfilling, work related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication and absorption. Vigor is characterized by high levels of energy and mental resilience while working, the willingness to invest effort in one’s work, and persistence even in the face of difficulties. Vigor is identified through the level of energy, zest and stamina showed by the employees when working. Dedication refers to being strongly involved in one's work and experiencing a sense of significance, enthusiasm, inspiration, pride, and challenge. The employees who score high on dedication could identified easily with their work since the work is experienced as meaningful, inspiring, and challenging to them. Not only that they usually feel enthusiastic and proud about their work. Absorption is characterized by being fully concentrated and happily engrossed in one’s work, whereby time passes quickly and one has difficulties with detaching oneself from work. The employees who score high on absorption feel that they usually are happily attached to their work, and have difficulties in separating from work. As a result, everything else around is forgotten and time seems to fly while working. Similarly Hallberg & Schaufeeli, 2006 presented the employee engagement concept in theoretical and empirical manner and defined it as representing experience of vigor, dedication to the role, and periods of absorption over extended periods of time. Further Shuck & Wollard, 2010 defined employee engagement as an individual employee’s cognitive, emotional and behavioral state directed towards desired organizational outcomes. Further in Khan’s study of engagement and disengagement he stated employee engagement was a concurrent expression of one’s preferred self and promotion of connections to others while disengagement was identified to be withdrawal of oneself and one’s preferred behaviors, promoting less connectedness, emotional absence and passive behavior for work(Khan(1990) as cited in Shuck, Rocco & Albornoz(2011)). Moreover employee engagement is defined as “positive attitude held by the employee toward the organization and its values, and an engaged employee is aware of business context, and works with colleagues to improve performance within the job for the benefit of the organization....”(Robertson, Birch & Cooper, 2012). Marie Valantin, Celestino Valantin & Nafuckho, 2015 investigate and found that during the period of 1992 and 2001 there were no researches taken place on the topic employee engagement, in other words during that period there was a space in the evolutionary time line. In a research conducted on “Exploring employee engagement from the employee perspective: implications for HRD” by Shuck, Rocco & Albornoz, 2011, presented a model of employee engagement and disengagement through their research findings. The model comprised of two factors namely environment and person. As mentioned in the research the environment is a reflection of all items in the environment such as people in the environment, physical space of the environment, the climate of the environment and etc. The environment is consist with both tangible and intangible elements. Tangible elements were defined as the things that are physically present. Intangible elements were defined as the items that have no physical characteristics. For an example trust, corporation, being free from fear, community, attachment and learning. On the other hand person is a reflection of everything about a person: the emotions of the person, personality of the person, physical traits, family and others. The person is consist with two elements called internal and external. Internal elements were defined as items that affects the person and are inside of a person, like feelings and emotions. External elements were defined as items that affected to a person but exist outside of the person and noticeable to others. The model clearly shows the interaction between the components and elements which relates to employee engagement and disengagement. It suggest that both engagement and disengagement are prospective outcomes, depending on how the person and the environment interact. Further in the research they have emphasis that no one factor alone contributes to create engagement or disengagement at work. Theories Relate to Employee Engagement Maslow Hierarchy of Needs Hertzberg Two Factor Theory Social Exchange Theory Psychological Empowerment The psychological perspective on empowerment focuses on the employee’s perceptions of empowerment (Thomas & Velthouse, 1990).The focus is on the individual, with empowerment viewed as a personal attribute (Conger & Kanungo, 1988 as cited in Thomas & Velthouse, 1990). Psychological empowerment is “changes in cognitive variables, called task assessments, which determine motivation in workers” (Thomas and Velthouse, 1990). This psychological perspective views empowerment as organic or bottom-up processing in which empowerment is achieved only when this psychological perspective views empowerment as organic or bottom-up processing in which empowerment is achieved only when psychological states produce a perception of empowerment within the employee (Wilkinson(1998) as cited in Spreitzer (2007)). Apart from that Spreitzer, 2007 views psychological perspective of empowerment as organic or bottom-up processing in which empowerment is achieved only when psychological states produce a perception of empowerment within employees. Empowerment is not something that managers do to their employees (Quinn & Spreitzer (1997) as cited in Spreitzer (2007)). In other words, employees are empowered only when they perceive themselves to be so (Mishra & Spreitzer, 1998; Quinn & Spreitzer, 1997). In addition to that empirical studies have shown that innovativeness of individuals, problem solving skills and positive upward influencing behaviors are the consequences of psychological empowerment (Zimmerman, 1995). Menon (2001), said that psychological empowerment represents a psychological state that can be measured and it is considered as an uninterrupted variable, where the people can be viewed as either more or less empowered rather than empowered or not empowered. As mentioned above, this study will focus on the psychological empowerment perspective. Psychological empowerment refers to a set of psychological states that are necessary for individuals to feel a sense of control in relation to their work. Rather than focusing on managerial practices that share power with employees at all levels, the psychological perspective is focused on how employees experience their work. This perspective refers to empowerment as the individual belief that employees have about their role in relation to the organization (Bandura as cited in Spreitzer, 2007). Solansky (2014) cited evidence from Conger & Kanugo (1988) and mentioned that beyond the power sharing condition of empowerment there is a psychological experience of empowerment which experienced by the individuals. According to above statement, the psychological experience is one of motivational self-efficacy. Self- efficacy is defined as an individual’s belief to perform the activities skillfully which are to be done (Gist (1987) as cited in Solansky (2014)). As an extension of the idea Thomas & Velthouse, 1990 said that empowerment is an increased task intrinsic motivation. The dimensions of psychological empowerment are also known as the components of psychological empowerment. These dimensions are firstly introduced by Thomas & Velthouse in 1990. Building on the Thomas & Velthouse model of empowerment Spreizer (1995) validated a measures for all four dimensions of empowerment. In her research series on empowerment, Spreizer found that, if an organization wants to achieve or get the full benefits of empowerment, it is needed to be provide and create an environment where all the four components of empowerment exist. The four components of psychological empowerment, namely meaningfulness, competence, Self-determination, and impact can be describes as follows. Meaningfulness As per the idea of Thomas and Velthouse (1990), meaningfulness involves “the individual intrinsic caring on a given task”. Further Spreizter (1995) defined meaning as “value of a work goal or purpose, judged in relation to an individual’s own ideas or standards”. Siegall & Gardner, 2000 mentioned that the work done by an individual should be personally meaningful. Meaning involves a fit between the requirements of a work role and beliefs, values, and behaviors and it can be found in almost any task, job or organization (Pratt & Ashforth, 2003). Competence Competence is also considered as self-efficacy by some authors. According to the definition of Thomas & Velthouse (1990), he uses the term self-efficacy instead of competence and it was defined as the degree to which a person can perform activities skilfully when doing the work. By giving the same idea Spreitzer (1995) defined competence as an individual’s belief in his or her capacity to perform activities with skill. Competence was measured by a job holder’s confidence in their ability to perform the job well, self-assurance on the personal capabilities to perform work activities and sense of mastery about the necessary job skills (Siegall & Gardner, 2000). Self-determination Thomas & Velthouse (1990) defined choice as involving casual responsibility for a person’s actions. Spreitzer (1995) in her research introduced self-determination as choice and defined as autonomy in the initiation and continuation of work behaviors and processes. Ugwu, Onyishi & Sanchez (2014) cited the definition from Deci & Ryan (2000) and mentioned that self-determination is an individual’s sense of having a choice or freedom in initiating and regulating actions. Impact According to the definition of Thomas & Velthouse (1990), impact was the degree to which the behavior is seen as making a difference in terms of accomplishing the purpose of the tasks. Few years later Spreitzer, 1995 defined impact as the degree to which an individual can influence strategic, administrative, or operating outcomes at work. In other words, employees feel in control and perceive that they are capable of shaping their work role and context. Quinn and Spreitzer (1997) state that impact is the accomplishment one feels in achieving goals. The feeling of perceived impact involves the sense that employees’ activities are really accomplishing something and that others listen to them (Quinn & Spreitzer, 1997) Conceptual Framework Based on the literature a model was developed and it is presented in Figure 1. Figure 1: Conceptual Framework Dependent Variable Independent Variable H 1 Meaning Competence Self-determination Impact Psychological Empowerment Employee Engagement Vigor Dedication Absorption H 1a H 1c H 1b H 1d The above figure 1 signifies the conceptual framework that specifies the variables that the researcher intends to explore in the following research. In the current research employee engagement is taken as the dependent variable while psychological empowerment is taken as the independent variable as shown in the framework. The independent variable is sub divided in to four main dimensions namely meaning, competence, self-determination and impact. The hypothesized relationships among constructs are shown in the same figure. Current research is access the relationship and impact between the above stated variables and dimensions, assuming that the other factors are constant. Development of Hypotheses Having considered to the evidences supported by literature, following hypotheses have been derived by the researcher. H1: There is a significant impact of psychological empowerment on employee engagement of the executive level employees working in Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. H1a: There is a significant impact of meaning on employee engagement of the executive level employees working in Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. H1b: There is a significant impact of competence on employee engagement of the executive level employees working in Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. H1c: There is a significant impact of self-determination on employee engagement of the executive level employees working in Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. H1 d: There is a significant impact of impact on employee engagement of the executive level employees working in Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. H2: There is a significant relationship between psychological empowerment and employee engagement of the executive level employees working in Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. Research Design This study is a quantitative study that attempts to find out the solution for the research problem of ‘assessing the impact of psychological empowerment on employee engagement of executive level employees at Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd’. As the current study attempts to test the formulated hypotheses and the established relationships in the research model, this would be considered as an explanatory research. The current study explains the relationships between variables and it also becomes descriptive in nature. Thus, for the current study, quantitative explanatory research design is more appropriate to be continued. Further, this is a cross sectional study as data will be collected only in a particular point of time and it will not repeat. Also, researcher's interference will be minimum in the present study. Unit of analysis will be at the individual level; an executive level employee serving for Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. The study will be conducted among 63 executive level employees who works for Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd within Ja-Ela area. The Krejcie & Morgan (1970) sampling table was used as the base to determine the sample size from the population. Data will be collected through a self-administered, pre-tested, standard questionnaire which has met the accepted standards of validity and reliability. Data was analyzed using SPSS and Excel. Frequency analysis, correlation test and regression analysis will be performed to analyze data, and to test the advanced hypotheses. Population & Sampling The population concerned for the current study includes the executive level employees, serving for the selected factories of Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd which are located in the in the Ja- Ela area. According to the SAP updates as at 25th November 2017, there were 75 executive level employees are currently working for the selected factories. The table 3.2 shows how the population is distributed among factories, from which a sample of 63 will be taken. As the total number of respondents in the population is known, simple random sampling technique would be more appropriate to be used to select a representative sample (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2009). As per the sample size calculation table of Krejcie & Morgan (1970), total of 63 executive level employees was selected randomly from the factories of Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd which are located in the in the Ja- Ela area where the population was 75 executive level employees. Hence, the unit of analysis is at the individual level; an executive level employee. Data Analysis Data was collected using questionnaires. The population of the study is executive level employees in Camso Lordstar (Pvt) Ltd, who works for the factories located in the Ja-Ela area. From the total population of 75 executive level employees sample size was determined as 63 executives, according to the sample size calculation table of Krejcie & Morgan (1970). Out of 75 executives 63 executives were randomly selected to distribute the questionnaire. Two questionnaires were not returned, thus reducing the number of returned questionnaires to 61 (96.83%). Reliability and Validity Reliability Reliability measure the internal consistencies of the measurement instruments, which indicate homogeneity of the items, consist within the questionnaire whether it taps the original concept of the variable. According to the Sekaran (2006), reliability of a measure demonstrates the stability and consistency with which the Instrument is measuring the concept and helps to assess the “goodness” of a measure. Table 1. Results of Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha Value Variable Cronbach’s coefficient alpha Psychological Empowerment 0.702 Employee Engagement 0.706 (Source: Survey Data, 2017) Validity The content validity of questionnaire has analyzed using factor analysis. According to Sekaran (2006) content validity ensures that questionnaire consists of adequate and representative items which tough the original concept of the variable. The validity of the measurement was ensured by calculating Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy (KMO). Therefore measurement instrument can accept as validate instrument which consist of adequate and representative items that cover original idea of variables. Table 2. KMO and Bartlett's Test Variable Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy Sig. Value Psychological Empowerment 0.532 .000 Employee Engagement 0.663 .000 (Source: Survey Data, 2017) Descriptive Statistics Frequency distribution analysis was made separately for the independent variable psychological empowerment and the dependent variable employee engagement. Descriptive Statistics of the Psychological Empowerment of the Sample The frequency distribution table can be illustrated as below. The average value of psychological empowerment has calculated by considering all the factors of independent variable by including meaning, competence, self-determination and impact. As indicated in the table mean value of the distribution is 4.0314 which indicates that psychological empowerment of the respondents are “high”. And the skewness of the distribution is .065 while kurtosis value is -.195. Table 3. Descriptive Statistics for Psychological Empowerment Statistic Std. Error Psychological Empowerment Average Mean 4.0314 .03550 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Bound 3.9604 Upper Bound 4.1024 5% Trimmed Mean 4.0258 Median 4.0833 Variance .077 Std. Deviation .27729 Minimum 3.50 Maximum 4.75 Range 1.25 Interquartile Range .42 Skewness .065 .306 Kurtosis -.195 .604 (Source: Survey Data, 2017) Descriptive Statistics of the Employee Engagement of the Sample The frequency distribution analysis was made separately for the dependent variable of employee engagement. The frequency distribution of employee engagement is presented in the table 4. As indicated by the table the mean value of the distribution is 3.9559 which indicated that the employee engagement of the respondents is “High”. The skewness and kurtosis of the distribution are -.189 and -.069. Table 4. Descriptive Statistics for Employee Engagement Statistic Std. Error Employee Engagement Average Mean 3.9559 .03495 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Bound 3.8860 Upper Bound 4.0259 5% Trimmed Mean 3.9579 Median 3.9375 Variance .075 Std. Deviation .27299 Minimum 3.19 Maximum 4.50 Range 1.31 Interquartile Range .41 Skewness -.189 .306 Kurtosis -.069 .604 (Source: Survey Data, 2017) Test of Linearity The linearity assumption has been tested with scatter plots. The scatter plots indicate how one variable is affected by another variable. In this research, the researcher made an assumption that there is a linear relationship among psychological empowerment and employee engagement. Correlation Analysis As the relationship between psychological empowerment and employee engagement is linear, researcher used the 'Pearson Correlation Coefficient' to test the strength of the relationship among above mentioned two constructs/variables. Correlation Analysis between Meaning and Employee Engagement Pearson correlations were computed between Meaning and Employee engagement. As shown in the table 5, Pearson Correlation coefficient is 0.462, which shows that there is a moderate positive relationship between the independent variable and the dimension meaning. On the other hand correlation coefficient is significant at the sig. 0.000 level (2- tailed) and this value is below the 0.01 significant level. So, there is statistical evidence to claim that there is a significant relationship between Meaning and employee engagement among executive level employees of Camso Loadatar (Pvt) Ltd. Table 5. Result of Correlation Analysis of Meaning and Employee Engagement Employee Engagement Average Meaning Average Employee Engagement Average Pearson Correlation 1 .462** Sig. (2-tailed) .000 N 61 61 Meaning Average Pearson Correlation .462** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 N 61 61 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). (Source: Survey Data, 2017) Correlation Analysis between Competence and Employee Engagement Pearson correlations were computed between competence and employee engagement. As shown in the table 6, Pearson Correlation coefficient is 0.000, which shows that there is a no relationship between two variables. On the other hand correlation coefficient is significant at the sig. 0. 998 level (2- tailed). So, there is statistical evidence to claim that there is a no significant relationship between Competence and employee engagement among executive level employees of Camso Loadatar (Pvt) Ltd. The researcher would not further calculate the regression for the dimension of competence. Hypothesis H 1b cannot be accepted, since there would not be an impact of competence on employee engagement without having a significant relationship. Table 6. Result of Correlation Analysis of Competence and Employee Engagement Employee Engagement Average Competence Average Employee Engagement Average Pearson Correlation 1 .000 Sig. (2-tailed) .998 N 61 61 Competence Average Pearson Correlation .000 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .998 N 61 61 (Source: Survey Data, 2017) Correlation Analysis between Self-determination and Employee engagement Pearson correlations were computed between self-determination and employee engagement. As shown in the table 7, Pearson Correlation coefficient is 0.167, which shows that there is a positive week relationship between two variables but the correlation coefficient is significant at the sig. value of 0. 200 level (2- tailed). So, there is statistical evidence to claim that there is no significant relationship between Self-determination and employee engagement among executive level employees of Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. The researcher would not calculate regression for the dimension of self-determination. So the Hypothesis H 1C cannot be accepted, since there would not be an impact of self-determination on employee engagement without having a significant relationship. Table 7. Result of Correlation Analysis of Self-determination and Employee Engagement Employee Engagement Average Self-determination Average Employee Engagement Average Pearson Correlation 1 .167 Sig. (2-tailed) .200 N 61 61 Self-determination Average Pearson Correlation .167 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .200 N 61 61 (Source: Survey Data, 2017) Correlation Analysis between Impact and Employee engagement Pearson correlations were computed between Impact and Employee engagement. As shown in the table 8, Pearson Correlation coefficient is 0. 264, which shows that there is a positive week relationship between two variables. On the other hand correlation coefficient is significant at the sig. 0. 040 level (2- tailed) and this value is below the 0.05 significant level. So, the statistical evidence in the table claim that there is a significant relationship between Impact and employee engagement among executive level employees of Camso Loadatar (Pvt) Ltd. Table 8. Result of Correlation Analysis of the Impact and Employee Engagement Employee Engagement Average Impact Average Employee Engagement Average Pearson Correlation 1 .264* Sig. (2-tailed) .040 N 61 61 Impact Average Pearson Correlation .264* 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .040 N 61 61 *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). (Source: Survey Data, 2017) Correlation Analysis for Main two variables (Psychological Empowerment and Employee engagement) According to study main independent variable can be identified as Psychological empowerment and depend variable is Employee engagement. Based on the four dimensions meaning, competence, self-determination and impact the concept of psychological empowerment would be measured. According to the table 9, the Pearson Correlation coefficient shown as 0. 349 which can be identified as positive weak relationship in between two variables. And the correlation coefficient sig. value can be identified as 0.006 which is below the 0.01 significance level (2-tailed). Therefore with the selected factors for the study it can be conclude that there is positive weak relationship in between psychological empowerment and employee engagement. Therefore the H1 hypothesis can be accepted. Table 9. Result of Correlation Analysis of the Psychological Empowerment and Employee Engagement Employee Engagement Average Psychological Empowerment Average Employee Engagement Average Pearson Correlation 1 .349** Sig. (2-tailed) .006 N 61 61 Psychological Empowerment Average Pearson Correlation .349** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .006 N 61 61 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). (Source: Survey Data, 2017) By considering above statistics that has been calculated based on the dimensions of the independent variable it can be finally conclude that only two dimensions out of four (Meaning and Impact) and additively all dimensions(Independent Variable) would create a significant relationship with the dependent variable, employee engagement. The other two dimensions (Competence and Self-determination) would not create a significant relationship with the dependent variable, employee engagement. Therefore the alternative hypothesis developed as H 1b and H1c cannot be accepted by the study, since without having a significant relationship, the impact between those also be insignificant. Regression Analysis As per the results obtained from correlation analysis, it can be identified that the two dimensions of Meaning and Impact out of four dimensions would only create a significant relationship with the dependent variable, employee engagement. And also the independent variable and the dependent variable as a whole has shown a significant relationship. So, the current researcher could proceed to measure the impact through the regression analysis only for above stated dimensions and variables which indicated significant relationship between two variables. Regression Analysis for Meaning on Employee Engagement (There is a significant impact of meaning on employee engagement of the executive level employees working in Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd). According to the table 10, the R square value is 0.214, which implies a weak positive impact of meaning on employee engagement. The beta value in the table is 0.462. On the other hand according to the table sig. value is 0.000 level (2- tailed) and this value is below the 0.01 significant level. There is statistical evidence to claim that there is a significant impact of Meaning and employee engagement among executive level employees of Camso Loadatar (Pvt) Ltd. So the developed hypothesis H1a is accepted. Table 10. Result of Regression Analysis of the Meaning and Employee Engagement Method Linear R Squire .214 Adjusted R Squire .200 F 16.034 Significance .000 B constant 2.689 Standard beta .462 (Source: Survey Data, 2017) Regression Analysis for Impact on Employee Engagement (There is a significant impact of impact on employee engagement of the executive level employees working in Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd). According to the 11th table, the R square value is 0. 070, which implies a positive weak impact of impact on employee engagement. The beta value in the table is 0.264. On the other hand according to table 4.24 sig. value is 0. 040 level (2- tailed) and this value is below the 0.05 significant level. There is statistical evidence to claim that there is a significant impact of impact on employee engagement among executive level employees of Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. Therefore the hypothesis H1d is accepted. Table 11. Result of Regression Analysis of the Impact on Employee Engagement Method Linear R Squire .070 Adjusted R Squire .054 F 4.416 Significance .040 B constant 3.338 Standard beta .262 (Source: Survey Data, 2017) Regression Analysis of Psychological Empowerment on Employee Engagement (There is a significant impact of psychological empowerment on employee engagement of the executive level employees working in Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd). According to the table 12, the R square value is 0. 122, which implies a weak positive impact of psychological empowerment on employee engagement. The beta value in the table is 0.264. On the other hand sig. value is 0. 006 level (2- tailed) and this value is below the 0.05 significant level. There is statistical evidence to state that there is a significant impact of psychological empowerment on employee engagement among executive level employees of Camso Loadatar (Pvt) Ltd. Therefore the main hypothesis H1 is accepted. Table 12. Result of Regression Analysis of the Psychological Empowerment and Employee Engagement Method Linear R Squire .122 Adjusted R Squire .107 F 8.175 Significance .006 B constant 2.571 Standard beta .349 (Source: Survey Data, 2017) Findings, Recommendations and Conclusion Key Findings Throughout the chapter it has analyzed measurement instrument using descriptive statistics, correlation and regression in order to identify the relationship and impact of the independent variable dependent variable and finally it can be conclude as below given table. Table 13. Findings of the Analysis Independent Variable/Dimension Dependent Variable Hypotheses Accept/Reject Psychological Empowerment Employee Engagement H1: There is a significant impact of psychological empowerment on employee engagement of the executive level employees working in Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. Accepted Meaning Employee Engagement H1a: There is a significant impact of meaning on employee engagement of the executive level employees working in Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. Accepted Competence Employee Engagement H1b: There is a significant impact of competence on employee engagement of the executive level employees working in Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. Rejected Self-determination Employee Engagement H1c: There is a significant impact of self-determination on employee engagement of the executive level employees working in Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. Rejected Impact Employee Engagement H1d: There is a significant impact of impact on employee engagement of the executive level employees working in Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. Accepted Psychological Empowerment Employee Engagement H2: There is a significant relationship between psychological empowerment and employee engagement of the executive level employees working in Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. Accepted It was found to be that there is a weak positive relationship between psychological empowerment and employee engagement. The Pearson correlation between these variable was 0.349, which is significant at .006 levels. This was based on two - tailed tests. Because of that H2 hypothesis can be accepted. Out of four dimensions of psychological empowerment only the dimension of meaning and impact respectively had a positive moderate relationship (Pearson correlation 0.462) and a positive weak relationship (Pearson correlation 0.264). The regression analysis was calculated between psychological empowerment and employee engagement and resulted the R square value as 0. 122, which means psychological empowerment has an impact of only 12.2% on employee engagement while 87.8% impact comes from the factors other than the psychological empowerment. The beta value in the table is 0.264. The sig. value is 0. 006 level (2- tailed) and this value is below the 0.05 significant level. Consequently the both dimensions of the independent variable, meaning and impact had a positive weak relationship. Respectively the R square values are calculated to be 0.214 and 0.070. So the hypothesis of H1, H1a and H1d are accepted. The research article “Linking organizational trust with employee engagement: the role of psychological empowerment” by Ugwu, Onyishi & Sanchez (2014) identified the relationship between employee engagement and psychological empowerment in a systematic way. In their research they suggested that the employees who are empowered tend to find meaning in what they do, feel they are in control of the work they do, feel that they have the required capacity to perform their job roles and believe that they can influence for the outcomes of the job. In that way psychological empowerment help employees to become more engaged for the work. Current researcher have measured the relationship between psychological empowerment and employee engagement and also the impact of the main independent variable and the dimensions of the independent variable with the dependent variable in a detailed way in relation to the selected company Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. Implications Findings of the current research study has both the theoretical implications and practical implications. This measurement instrument on the perceptions of psychological empowerment and employee engagement can be used in future researches by academics and practitioners when evaluating the relationship or the impact of psychological empowerment and employee engagement. This will also provide insights to the selected organization to identify the level of engagement that their employees are having currently and steps can be taken to increase the level of engagement of the employees. On the other hand the results of the study would make a platform for the competitors in the same industry to identify what are the steps that Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd has taken to empower their employees psychologically and how those steps are been practically implemented within the working environment. And also this study would be helpful for the potential employees of the organization, to get an understanding on how company is treated to its employees. Since the main hypothesis of the research got accepted, it is confirmed that the psychological empowerment has a significant positive weak impact on career development of employees. This research study clearly identifies what dimensions of the independent variable has a positive significant impact and what dimensions of the independent variable has no significant impact on the dependent variable employee engagement. Also this study provides recommendations which can be used by practitioners to achieve more employee engagement for the companies. The findings from this study will contribute theoretically to the literature and practically for many parties including employers, employees and students. Recommendations In today’s competitive world of business it is essential to increase the level of employee engagement in order to get the maximum output or the contribution from the employees. The current research results indicate that for executive level employees in the selected organization, the impact of psychological empowerment on employee engagement is only 12.2%. As a result the factors that affect other than psychological empowerment is amounted to 87.8%. The residual value of 87.8% may include the other factors which affect to employee engagement such as pay fairness, welfare facilities provided, relationship with the supervisor, peer culture and development opportunities. The mean value of employee engagement is accounted to be 3.9559 which indicates that employees within the company are highly engaged to their work. Since psychological empowerment factor contributes a less portion of 12.2% to the level of engagement, the employees in the selected company Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd may engaged through other factors such as fair, attractive pay levels and welfare facilities provided by the company, friendly working environment created, the greater chance of getting more knowledge and also feeling that the job is secured. The mean value of the distribution is 4.03 which indicates that psychological empowerment of the respondents are also “high”. So, this recommendation will helpful them to further increase the level of employee engagement. Instead of giving financial and other tangible benefits to improve the level of employee engagement if the company can move in to more intrinsic methods such as psychologically empowered employees to do the work the company can engage their employees in a long lasing manner with a minimum cost, since the engagement is coming out from the inner feelings and not because of mere financial and other tangible benefits. Limitations of the Study The researcher’s objective was to identify the impact of psychological empowerment on employee engagement. The current researcher only consider about the factories located in the Ja-Ela area which belongs to Camso Loadstar (pvt) Ltd. In order to get more validate and reliable information the researcher may not limit in to a particular area. Taking data from one industry itself limits the generalizability of the information. Therefore it is advised for the future researchers to consider other industries, without considering only one industry if the researchers need to come to a very practical conclusion. Questionnaire response may be wrong due to they deliberately change the answer. The employees might not respond genuinely because of fear of mentioning ill of the organization. Some employees were unable to take time for reading well and answering the questionnaire due to lack of time they had as a result of high work pressure. This study was based on the personal views of respondents through the questionnaire. It may not be effective and becomes bias as the respondent’s feelings will be affected for the answers. And the responses were limited only to the 63 executive employees in Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. As this is a cross sectional study sometimes the findings may not be valid as time differences can be happened. For future researches longitudinal study is recommended. Only 12.2% of psychological empowerment is impacted for employee engagement, hence future researchers investigate other 87.8% of unexplained factors in the organization is recommended. Conclusion Now a day human resource is considered to be the most important resource of an organization to remain competitive in the business world. The general objective of this study is to investigate the impact of psychological empowerment on employee engagement with special reference to Camso Loadstar (Pvt) Ltd. The results from this study examined and determined the relationship between psychological empowerment on employee engagement. Based on the result of Pearson Correlation Analysis, it showed that there was a weak positive relationship (0.349) between psychological empowerment and employee engagement. It implies that it is 99% confident level that there was a positive weak significant relationship. Researcher was able to find psychological empowerment has a weak positive and significant impact(R squire= 0.122) on employee engagement. Consequently this research article address the all objectives of the research. References Afsar, B., & Badir, Y. (2016). The mediating role of psychological empowerment on the relationship between person-organization fit and innovative work behaviour. Journal of Chinese Human Resource Management, 7(1), 5-26. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/ JCHRM-11-2015-0016 Albrecht, S. L., Bakker, A. B., Gruman, J. A., Macey, W. H., & Saks, A. M. (2015). Employee engagement, human resource management practices and competitive advantage: An integrated approach. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 2(1), 7-35. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-08-2014-0042 Baron, A. (2012). What do engagement measures really mean. Strategic HR Review, 12(1), 21-25. Retrieved from https:// doi.org/10.1108/14754391311282450 Bordin, C., Bartram, T., & Casimir, G. (2006). The antecedents and consequences of psychological empowerment among Singaporean IT employees. Management Research News, 30(1), 34-46. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/01409170710724287 Cattermole, G., Johnson, J., & Roberts, K. (2013). Employee engagement welcomes the dawn of an empowerment culture. Strategic HR Reveiw, 12(5), 250-254. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/SHR-04-2013-0039 Chaudhary,, R. (2017). How to increase employee engagement: The role of corporate social responsibility. Human Resource Management International Digest, 25(6), 42-44. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID-06-2017-0114 Choo, L. S., Mat, N., & Al‐Omari, M. (2013). Organizational practices and employee engagement: a case of Malaysia electronics manufacturing firms. Business Strategy Series, 14(1), 3-10. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/17515631311295659 Devendhiran, S., & Wesley, J. R. (2017). Spirituality at work: enhancing levels of employee engagement. Development and Learning in Organizations: An International Journal, 31. Devendhiran, S., & Wesley, J. R. (2017). Spirituality at work: enhancing levels of employee engagement. Development and Learning in Organizations: An International Journal, 31(5), 9-13. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/ DLO-08-2016-0070 Dewettinck, K., & Ameijde, M. v. (2011). Linking leadership empowerment behaviour to employee attitudes and behavioural intentions: Testing the mediating role of psychological empowerment. Personnel Review, 40(3), 284-305. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/00483481111118621 Doherty, R. (2010). Making employee engagement an end‐to‐end practice. Strategic HR Review, 9(3), 32-37. Retrieved from https:// doi.org/10.1108/14754391011040055 Elsey, G. (2005). Building employee engagement at Sensis. Strategic HR Review, 4(2), 16-19. Retrieved from https:// doi.org/10.1108/14754390580000589 Gonring, M. P. (2008). Customer loyalty and employee engagement: an alignment for value. Journal of Business Strategy, 19(4), 29-40. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/02756660810887060 Greasley, K., Bryman, A., Dainty, A., Price, A., Soetanto, R., & King, N. (2005). Employee perceptions of empowerment. Employee Relations, 27(4), 354-368. Retrieved from https:// doi.org/10.1108/01425450510605697 Increasing employee engagement: The role of interpersonal leadership. (2014). Strategic Direction, 31(2), 34-36. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/SD-12-2014-0172 Joo, B.-K., Lim, D. H., & Kim, S. (2016). Enhancing work engagement: The roles of psychological capital, authentic leadership, and work empowerment. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37(8), 1117-1134. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-01-2015-0005 Jose, G., & Mampilly , S. R. (2015). Relationships Among Perceived Supervisor Support, Psychological Empowerment and Employee Engagement in Indian Workplaces. Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health, 30(3), 231-250. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15555240.2015.1047498 Kang, M., & Sung, M. (2017). How symmetrical employee communication leads to employee engagement and positive employee communication behaviors: The mediation of employeeorganization relationships. Journal of Communication Management, 21(1), 82-102. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/JCOM-04-2016-0026 McBain, D. (2007). The practice of engagement: Research into current employee engagement practice. Strategic HR Review, 6(6), 16-19. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/14754390780001011 Meyerson, S. L., & Kline, T. J. (2008). Psychological and environmental empowerment: antecedents and consequences. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 29(5), 444-460. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730810887049 Morrongiello, C., N’Goala, G., & Kreziak , D. (2017). Customer Psychological Empowerment as a Critical Source of Customer Engagement. International Studies of Management & Organization, 47(1), 61-87. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00208825.2017.1241089 Orpen, C. (1994). Empowering the Supervisory Role. Work Study, 43(2), 5-8. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/ EUM0000000003995 Ouweneel, E., Blanc, P. M., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2013). Do‐it‐yourself: An online positive psychology intervention to promote positive emotions, self‐efficacy, and engagement at work. Career Development International, 18(2), 173-195. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-10-2012-0102 Rana, S., Ardichvili, A., & Tkachenko, O. (2014). A theoretical model of the antecedents and outcomes of employee engagement: Dubin's method. 26(3/4), 249-266. Retrieved from https:// doi.org/10.1108/JWL-09-2013-0063 Robertson, I. T., & Cooper, C. L. (2010). Full engagement: the integration of employee engagement and psychological well‐being. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 31(4), 324-336. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/01437731011043348 Robertson, I. T., Birch, A. J., & Cooper, C. L. (2012). Job and work attitudes, engagement and employee performance: Where does psychological well‐being fit in? Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 33(3), 224-232. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/01437731211216443 Robertson, I. T., & Cooper, C. L. (2010). Full engagement: the integration of employee engagement and psychological well‐being. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 31(4), 324-336. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/01437731011043348 Schaufeli , W., & Bakker, A. (n.d.). UTRECHT WORK ENGAGEMENT SCALE. Preliminary Manual [Version 1.1, December 2004]. Occupational Health Psychology Unit Utrecht University. Shuck, B., Zigarmi, D., & Owen, J. (2015). Psychological needs, engagement, and work intentions: A Bayesian multi-measurement mediation approach and implications for HRD. European Journal of Training and Development, 2-21. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/ EJTD-08-2014-0061 Shuck, M. B., Rocco, T. S., & Albornoz, C. A. (2011). Exploring employee engagement from the employee perspective: implications for HRD. Journal of European Industrial Training, 35(4), 300-325. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/03090591111128306 Siegall, M., & Gardner, S. (2000). Contextual factors of psychological empowerment. Personnel Review, 29(6), 703-722. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480010296474 Solansky, S. (2014). Education and experience impact leadership development psychological empowerment. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 35(7), 637-648. Retrieved from https:// doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-07-2012-0091 Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological Empowerment in the Work Place: Dimensions, Measurement, and Validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442-1465. Stander, M. W., & Rothmann, S. (2009). Psychological empowerment of employees in selected organisations in South Africa. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology/SA Tydskrif vir Bedryfsielkunde, 35(1), 8. Retrieved from http://www.sajip.co.za Tinline, G., & Crowe, K. (2010). Improving employee engagement and wellbeing in an NHS trust. Strategic HR Review, 9(2), 19-24. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/14754391011022226 Townsend, P., & Gebhardt, J. (2008). Employee engagement – completely. Human Resource Management International Digest, 16(3), 22-24. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/09670730810869529 Ugwu, F. O., Onyish, I. E., & Rodríguez-Sánchez, A. M. (2014). Linking organizational trust with employee engagement: the role of psychological empowerment. Personnel Review, 43(3), 377-400. Retrieved from https:// doi.org/10.1108/PR-11-2012-0198 Valentin, M. A., Valentin, C. C., & Nafukho, F. M. (2015). The engagement continuum model using corporate social responsibility as an intervention for sustained employee engagement: Research leading practice. European Journal of Training and Development, 39(3), 182-202. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-01-2014-0007 Villiers, J. R., & Stander , M. W. (2011). Psychological Empowerment, Work Engagement and Turnover Intention: The Role of Leader Relations and Role Clarity in a Financial Institution. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 21(3), 405-412. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14330237.2011.10820474 Yoo, J. (2017). Customer power and frontline employee voice behavior: Mediating roles of psychological empowerment. European Journal of Marketing, 51(1), 238-256. Retrieved from https:// doi.org/10.1108/EJM-07-2015-0477