Managerial perspectives on employee engagement

  • Niki Romanou1,

    Affiliated with

    • Emma Soane1,

      Affiliated with

      • Katie Truss2,

        Affiliated with

        • Kerstin Alfes2,

          Affiliated with

          • Chris Rees3,

            Affiliated with

            • Mark Gatenby4,

              Affiliated with

              • Nick E Degleris5,

                Affiliated with

                • Eleftheria Mantelou5,

                  Affiliated with

                  • Andreas Solias5 and

                    Affiliated with

                    • Manto Karamberi5

                      Affiliated with

                      Annals of General Psychiatry20109(Suppl 1):S172

                      DOI: 10.1186/1744-859X-9-S1-S172

                      Published: 22 April 2010


                      Senior management and leadership are believed to be responsible for the employment of such initiatives and their own level of engagement appears to have a strong impact on the levels of employees' engagement, theory suggests. This qualitative research explores the perceived levels, drivers and benefits, as well as the levels of managerial engagement at Organisation A, a leading support services company in the UK. This working paper means to contribute to previous studies of engagement conducted by the Kingston Business School Employee Engagement Consortium.

                      Materials and methods

                      In total, 25 managers were interviewed and semi-structured interviews took place in February and March 2009 at the company's headquarters. In this working paper, the research model consists of five thematic principles: drivers and counter-divers of engagement, methods of engagement, (perceived) levels of employee engagement, (perceived) benefits of employee engagement, and managers' levels of engagement. These five core principles entail all the information needed to test the engagement process in the present organisation. In order to assess the sustainability of the research model, the method of template analysis was chosen.


                      Not surprisingly, the perceived levels of engagement are moderately high and managers seem to be engaged in their organisation driven by the challenging nature of the work, the recognition they receive and the feelings of accomplishment following a successful task. In line with these, what drives employee engagement is only slightly different: employees seem to be driven not only by the nature of their work but also by the career opportunities available at Organisation A and the collaborative and team-based organisational culture. In terms of benefits, employee engagement seems to lead to heightened organisational performance, improved customer satisfaction and low levels of absenteeism and turnover.


                      Managers were completely capable of identifying problematic areas in the engagement process and given the necessary resources might be in position to work on improving some critical elements of it.

                      Authors’ Affiliations

                      Department of Management, London School of Economics and Political Science
                      Kingston Business School, Kingston University
                      School of Management
                      School of Management, University of Surrey
                      Psychotherapeutic Center of Piraeus


                      1. Bakker AB, Schaufeli WB: 'Positive organizational behavior: Engaged employees in flourishing organizations'. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2008, 29: 147-154. 10.1002/job.515.View Article
                      2. Gatenby M, Rees C, Soane E, Truss K: Truss: Employee engagement in context. 2008, London: CIPD
                      3. King N: 'Using templates in the thematic analysis of text'. Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research. Edited by: Cassell C, Symon G. 2004, London: Sage
                      4. Macey WH, Schneider B: 'The meaning of employee engagement'. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice. 2008, 1: 3-30. 10.1111/j.1754-9434.2007.0002.x.View Article


                      © Romanou et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009

                      This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd.