Hurd Colostate 0053A 10472.Pdf (860.2Kb)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DISSERTATION VIRTUALLY ENGAGED: THE EFFECT OF A VIRTUAL WORK ENVIRONMENT ON TASK ENGAGEMENT, ITS ANTECEDENTS, AND CONSEQUENCES Submitted by Brian M. Hurd Department of Psychology In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado Summer 2011 Doctoral Committee: Advisor: Zinta S. Byrne Kurt K. Kraiger Michael F. Steger Jennifer E. Cross ABSTRACT VIRTUALLY ENGAGED: THE EFFECT OF A VIRTUAL WORK ENVIRONMENT ON TASK ENGAGEMENT, ITS ANTECEDENTS, AND CONSEQUENCES As organizations continue to adopt virtual work environments in an effort to reduce costs and offer employees greater flexibility, the effect of this work setting on employee engagement is not fully understood. This laboratory study investigates the effect of a virtual work environment on participant perceptions (N = 242) of engagement, its antecedents, and consequences in an effort to extend the Job Demands-Resources model of employee engagement (JD-R; Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). Specifically, it was proposed that the JD-R be expanded to include contextual variables (e.g., work environment) and that these variables potentially influence individuals’ appraisals of whether a work variable is a resource or a demand. To test this modified model, participants were assigned to work on a marketing task in either a virtual (N = 126) or co- located environment (N = 116). Results revealed that task engagement, quality of coworker relations, social presence, task performance, and task satisfaction were all higher and team uncertainty was lower for those working in a co-located environment compared to those working virtually. Team uncertainty and social presence partially mediated the relationship between work environment and quality of coworker relations. Team uncertainty was higher and social presence was lower for those working virtually ii as compared to those who were co-located, which in turn resulted in perceptions of reduced quality of coworker relations. Furthermore, task engagement fully mediated the relationship between quality of coworker relations and both performance and effort, and task engagement partially mediated the relationship between quality of coworker relations and task satisfaction. Quality of coworker relations was positively related to task engagement, which was related to increased task performance, effort, and task satisfaction. When combined, the results provide support for the proposed expansion of the JD-R to include contextual variables. Because resources and demands are fundamental to the JD-R and determine when employees become engaged versus disengaged, this extension to the model makes a significant contribution to the employee engagement and virtual work literatures. These results also offer practical applications for those organizations that operate virtual work environments. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work would not have been possible without the help and support of those around me. I want to thank Dr. Zinta Byrne, my advisor, for her incredible guidance and encouragement throughout this project and all the milestones along the way. I would also like to thank the members of my dissertation committee, Dr. Kurt Kraiger, Dr. Michael Steger, and Dr. Jennifer Cross, for their invaluable feedback and commitment to this project. I am also grateful for the incredible team of research colleagues who helped make this data collection possible. I would like to thank Josh Liff for his collaboration on this and other research projects and to our incredible research team, including Ryan Amaya, Ashley Meek, Cammie Karr, Ryan Tollis, Andrew Chun, Amy Vermillion, Alexa Wooderson, Erin Cohan, Chelsea Danielson, Amber Love, Brittany Pletcher, John Schumacher, Dawnelle Schlagel, Megan Verros, and Kimber Welton. This project would not have been completed without their enthusiasm and commitment. Finally, I would like to extend a heartfelt thank you to my colleagues for challenging me and to my family and friends for motivating me. To my family, Kristin and Carolyn, thank you for your never-ending love and support. You both give me the inspiration to achieve our dreams. iv DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to my parents, Stephen and Carol (1948-1999). Your love and encouragement has made me into the person I am today. Thank you for teaching me to work hard, to be kind, and to follow my passion for learning. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract .............................................................................................................................. ii Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................... iii Dedication ......................................................................................................................... iv Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 Employee Engagement ................................................................................................. 3 Behavioral Engagement ........................................................................................... 4 Trait Engagement ..................................................................................................... 4 State Engagement..................................................................................................... 5 Task Work Engagement ...................................................................................... 5 Approaches to the Study of Engagement ................................................................. 6 Kahn’s Engagement Framework......................................................................... 7 Schaufeli and Bakker’s Engagement Framework ............................................... 7 Related Relationships Between Engagement and Other Constructs ........................ 9 A Model of Virtual Work and Employee Engagement .............................................. 10 JD-R Model and a Virtual Work Environment ...................................................... 12 Quality of Coworker Relations and Employee Engagement ................................. 14 Hypothesis 1...................................................................................................... 16 Team Uncertainty.............................................................................................. 16 Hypothesis 2................................................................................................. 17 vi Social Presence ................................................................................................. 18 Hypothesis 3................................................................................................. 19 Effects on Engagement ..................................................................................... 19 Hypothesis 4................................................................................................. 19 Outcomes of Engagement ...................................................................................... 20 Task Performance ............................................................................................. 20 Hypothesis 5................................................................................................. 22 Effort ................................................................................................................. 22 Hypothesis 6................................................................................................. 23 Task Satisfaction ............................................................................................... 24 Hypothesis 7................................................................................................. 25 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 25 Method ............................................................................................................................. 27 Participants .................................................................................................................. 27 Measures ..................................................................................................................... 27 Procedure .................................................................................................................... 32 Results .............................................................................................................................. 37 Preliminary Analyses .................................................................................................. 37 Hypothesis 1................................................................................................................ 39 Mediation Models ....................................................................................................... 39 Hypothesis 2................................................................................................................ 40 Hypothesis 3................................................................................................................ 41 Hypothesis 4................................................................................................................ 42 vii Hypothesis 5................................................................................................................ 42 Hypothesis 6...............................................................................................................