Lincoln University College, 47301 Petaling Jaya, Selangor D. E., Malaysia
*Corresponding Author’s Email: luihilong@outlook.com
This multinational research tested the job demands-resources theory's hypothesised beneficial link between structural work accreditation and, in turn, task performance and quit intentions. More specifically, the study included responses from 1,033 organization employees in Spain and the United Kingdom. Work engagement was shown to have a constructive relationship with task performance and a negative relationship with intention to quit, and the constructive relationship between systematic and work commitment was somewhat tempered by psychological empowerment. Results from invariance studies corroborated the partial structural invariance of the proposed model, showing that the positive association between intellectual and workplace commitment was stronger for workers working in the United Kingdom than in Spain. The positive correlation between systematic delegation and employee commitment is examined, as are the implications for theory and management practice, such as the idea that psychological delegation may be the fundamental procedure explaining this correlation.
Keywords: Work Engagement; Workplace Commitment; Systematic Delegation
Since happy workers are more productive, there have been a lot of studies on how to keep employees engaged at work. They also report feeling healthier. The term "vigour" is used to describe a state of being in which one is physically and mentally fit and willing to put forth significant effort toward a goal. To be dedicated is to invest oneself fully in one's work with a sense of pride and enthusiasm. When one is absorbed in what they are doing, they are so involved in what they are doing that they don't realize how much time has passed.
The job demands-resources hypothesis says that a person's own skills and the opportunities they have at work are the most important factors in deciding if they will be invested in their work. It’s possible, however, that these aren't the only things that keep workers interested in their jobs. Both psychological and structural kinds of empowerment are used as management tools by companies to increase employee engagement and productivity. Enhanced intrinsic task motivation is a state of psychological empowerment that consists of a sense of purpose, competence, self-determination, and influence. These are inside brain processes that mirror the positive emotions one experiences upon completing the activity. Researchers have discovered a significant association between psychological empowerment and professional engagement, despite a lack of data to support the claim. People are structurally empowered when they have access to opportunities, the right knowledge, and assistance in the workplace. While research into the benefits of psychological empowerment for productivity in the workplace has been extensive, studies into the advantages of structural empowerment have been limited to the medical field. What's more, the interplay between structural and psychological types of empowerments as explanations for employee involvement in their work has received less consideration (Amor et al. 2021).
Aiming to meet that need is the present worldwide research endeavour. We investigate how factors like desire to resign and output on the job are linked to systematic and intellectual accreditation and work commitment (Albasal et al. 2022). Additionally, the theory is used to develop the connection between emotional and professional mandates in this research. We tested the hypothesised mediating mechanism across employees in Spain and the United Kingdom to see whether the expected mechanisms varied between groups. Both nations place a premium on hard work and have robust social support systems, but Spain also has a greater diversity of talents and a higher rate of job instability. Spain is seen as more collectivistic than the United Kingdom, culturally speaking. Because structural empowerment focuses on social frameworks and psychological empowerment centres on the person, it's crucial to compare their effects on workplace participation in nations with varied social norms (Agarwal et al. 2012).
This study adds to these two previous understandings. First, it helps us understand how and why empowerment works by proposing that psychological accreditation may account for structural empowerment's favourable impacts on employee engagement. The present study seeks to examine the process through which structural mandate leads to psychological empowerment. Prior research has demonstrated that structural accreditation decreases employee burnout. The present study analyses whether the same technique might boost employee motivation. This research broadens the scientific discipline web of job engagement by addressing structural and psychological delegation as possible causes. The suggested approaches are tested in two nations with very distinct cultural and institutional backgrounds: Spain and the United Kingdom. Theoretically, this is significant since it shows that theoretical assumptions exist independently of work-related and/or cultural variations between invariant countries. Undeviating patterns would highlight discrepancies across countries, leading to new approaches to investigation.
We will use the theory as a framework to look at how systematic and intellectual delegation affects employee commitment and work output. The level of satisfaction and output from employees in the workplace is theorized to be heavily influenced by the surrounding culture, according to the Just Culture Reality Theory. Task demands, which may account for exhaustion on the job, and job resources, which may account for motivation, are therefore acknowledged as two major categories of work characteristics by this theory. Employees bodies and brains may suffer as a result of the pressures of the workplace. Job features that may (1) help workers to achieve their goals and (2) lessen the toll that working has on their bodies and minds (3) Resources that encourage professional and personal development may be used in the workplace. Requests for projects start a health-disablement process that drains energy and causes fitness issues, while employment resources may kick off a stimulating process that leads to getting involved with one's work (Avolio et al. 2004).
Based on the core premise of The Concept of Self-analyzation, the idea suggests that job- related resources may foster both innate and extrinsic drive. According to the job- demotivation and motivation hypothesis, personal resources are just as important as job resources when it comes to keeping workers motivated. Having control over one's own time, money, and other assets boosts productivity because it allows individuals to pursue their own interests and develop personally. Workers are more involved in their occupations when they believe their workplace gives them opportunity to develop and apply their own personal resources, which is consistent with the findings of previous research on the topic. We propose that structural and psychological delegation may serve comparable purposes in understanding commitment towards work and its impacts, and we compare them to job and personal assets, respectively (Faisal-E-Alam & Nahar, 2022).
Organization settings and policies at work that promote access to chances, details, keeping up, and sources are what we mean when we talk about structural mandate. Learning and development opportunities provide exposure to novel tasks, which can lead to the acquisition of valuable new skills and expanded knowledge. Having visibility into the organization's goals, beliefs, policies, and decision-making processes is a second prerequisite that fosters empowerment at work. Having the backing of your colleagues, direct reports, and superiors is essential. Having access to resources, such as temporary aid in times of need and the time necessary to complete tasks, is crucial to the success of any business or organization (Albar et al. 2012).
Psychological empowerment, on the other hand, is a state of motivation that includes four areas: purpose, skills, freedom, and influence. The degree to which people believe their work makes a difference or is important is an indication of its significance. Competence means that you have the skills, knowledge, and experience you need to do something well. Self-analysis in the workplace refers to an employee's sense of agency. Impact refers to how much of an effect one's job has on a company or a certain division inside a company. Management, as argued by Spreitzer, can play a pivotal role in fostering empowerment among workers by strengthening all four dimensions of psychological empowerment through strategic planning and the implementation of work design.
When employees' needs for purpose, competence, self-determination, and effect are met, they say they feel psychologically empowered. The terms structural empowerment and job resources refer to elements of the workplace that facilitate the achievement of objectives. Kanter argues that all workers, regardless of their industry or position, may benefit from a higher-order concept known as structural empowerment, which includes factors like access to training and professional development. Individual traits such as optimism, self-efficacy, and hope are examples of personal resources, whereas the positive experiences gained from the activity are examples of psychological empowerment. As a result, it is critical to investigate structural and psychological accreditation since they are drivers of workplace meetings and differ from individual and institutionalized resources (Bagozzi & Heatherton, 1994).
Kanter defines power as the capacity to accomplish tasks and mobilize sources. Employees are more inclined to put forth extra effort when these social structures exist. Boamah and Laschinger, for instance, found that systematic approval combined with intellectual capital positively correlated with task commitment. Laschinger found that nurses who had greater structural empowerment also had greater effectiveness and workplace engagement.
Self-analysis theory is adapted in the theory to provide an explanation for how structural empowerment might increase motivation at work. In this light, it stands to reason that motivating worker in both internal and external ways, as is the case in empowered work environments, can boost employee engagement. Employees are more likely to be intrinsically motivated when they are provided opportunities to fulfil their fundamental human needs for sovereignty, being connected, and capacity via their work. For instance, new chances for growth, learning, and advancement help workers become more adept at their jobs. Because enabling work conditions can help employees achieve their professional objectives, they may also encourage extrinsic motivation.
Prior empirical studies demonstrated that performance feedback, growth opportunities, and organizational and social support generate job engagement (Bakker & Bal, 2010).
Few studies have looked at the connection between psychological empowerment and engagement in the workplace, despite the growing interest in its beneficial function for work outcomes including job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Previous studies have shown a favourable association between a nurse's professional practice setting and employee engagement, with psychological empowerment serving as a moderating factor. Along with extraversion and conscientiousness, Macsinga found that psychological empowerment significantly explained employees' dedication to their jobs. Along similar lines, Bhatnagar discovered that employees who felt more in control of their lives at work were more engaged in their jobs, which in turn led to greater opportunities for creativity and less interest in leaving the company (Bakker & Demerouti, 2008).
Employees who believe their job has significance, competence, self-analysis, and an effect on their department are more likely to display autonomous motivation, which leads to increased energy, devotion, and immersion in their work.
Kanter says empowered organizations provide workers with meaning and purpose by sharing their circumstances, values, and objectives. Spreitzer said psychological empowerment comes from meaningful and effective employment. Psychological delegation may follow structural accreditation. However, psychological certification is not a critical factor in the relationship between organizational hierarchy and employee satisfaction.
This idea is consistent with Job Demands and Resources, which suggests that resources provided by one's workplace may supplement those brought by one's own efforts to explain job satisfaction. Psychological empowerment is crucial for personal and societal development, growth, and happiness, which suggests that structural empowerment might help meet these needs. For instance, the provision of constructive criticism and advice promotes education and leads to greater skill. According to research by Gagne and Deci, workers' sense of purpose at work improves when they are provided with useful information about the company's execution, value, and strategies. Individuals become more self-reliant and confident because of their job learning.
The psychological mandate is driven by structural empowerment. This relationship has mostly been researched in the medical field. They discovered that perceptions of empowering workplace circumstances benefited Chinese workers' creativity. They also discovered that structural empowerment increased nurses and patients empowered behaviours, job satisfaction, and care quality in Canada. Laschinger discovered a relationship between systematic and intellectual approval and work satisfaction in a longitudinal study of nurses.
We propose that the favourable interrelation between systematic approval and employee commitment arises through intellectual approval, given that systematic mandate may be a driver of intellectual accreditation. The existence of specific environmental factors with features associated with structural empowerment has been shown to increase both psychological and behavioural levels of participation. For instance, an empirical study on health care workers found that the beneficial relationship between an empowered leader and employee engagement was mediated solely by employees' own feelings of empowerment. According to studies done on Chinese employees, researchers discovered that psychological approval mediated the connection between standard leader-member interchange and better task fulfilment, less intellectual retreat behaviour, and higher work execution. Similarly, it was shown that in Singapore's healthcare industry, a feeling of intellectual approval among workers moderated the beneficial association between transformational leadership and organizational commitment. We hypothesize that when a company gives its workers more chances to learn and grow, as well as more tools to do their jobs well, those people will feel more psychologically empowered and more invested in their work. When employees know they are valued, they are more likely to give their best on the job (Albrecht & Andreetta, 2011; Amor, Vázquez & Faíña, 2020).
Work commitment is important because of the impact it has on the attitudes, actions, and results of the business. Both quitting purpose and productivity on the job are examined here. Employee turnover is costly for businesses in many ways, including the opportunity cost of losing skilled workers as well as the direct expenditures of training and recruiting new staff. With a good outlook on their jobs and a sense of purpose in their work, engaged individuals are less likely to consider abandoning their positions. Work engagement has been shown to have an inverse relationship with attrition and absenteeism.
Task performance refers to how well duties and responsibilities are completed. Work involvement boosts performance because engaged personnel may perform better because they're enthusiastic, interested, and optimistic. These emotions create personal resources, including vitality, devotion, and absorption. Engaged individuals are more confident in achieving their job goals and using existing resources. Work involvement positively affects both self- and supervisor-rated task performance.
The current research also wants to see if the model holds true for workers in Spain and the UK, two countries with similar work environments, career prospects, and cultural norms. In a recent survey of working conditions in Europe, it was found that there were similarities in working quality, average weekly work hours, job intensity, and how much social support people felt they had. However, the working conditions for Spaniards are harsher than those in Britain. The large proportion of temporary employees in Spain has contributed to gender inequality in management and job instability. When compared to their Spanish counterparts, British employees have more chances for skill diversification, work-life balance, training, career promotion, and personal growth. In line with the theory's supporting premise, these distinctions indicate that structural and intellectual mandates may be more important in describing task commitment in high-stakes contexts. The British are more independent minded than their Spanish counterparts. It's possible that the cultural variations point to a greater prevalence of structural empowerment in collectivistic societies and a greater prevalence of psychological empowerment in individualistic cultures. Work engagement is a global issue, thus it's necessary to test if the posited processes hold true in countries with varying environmental and social standards. Given that this is the first investigation into these associations, we use a more open approach by working from hypotheses rather than a fixed set of assumptions.
Qualtrics conducted surveys in February and March of 2019. The online survey was made available to participants after they responded to the first email invitation. The objectives and methodology of the research were discussed. The worker eligibility age was set at 18. Two samples from service organizations were analysed.
515 Spanish people made up Sample 1. In this study, women made up 51% of the participants, and the average age and number of years with the company were both 40. Half were full-time employees, and 14.8% were contract workers. The government accounted for 19.90% of all employment, with the business sector coming in second at 13.60%, the hotel sector in third at 13.20%, and the educational sector in fourth place at 8.90%. Organizations ranging in size from very small through medium to large were all present.
There was a total of 518 people employed in the UK. In the second sample, 50% were women, and the average age was 39 standard deviations. Their average years with the company were 13.74 standard deviations. Out of a total population of 43.60 percent, 6.80 percent had full-time jobs and the rest held temporary positions. Education is at 10.60%, training is at 9.8%, health and social assistance are at 14.50%, and lodging and food service are at 15.60%. Employers ranging from the very small (36.2%) to the very large (22.5%), all of which had people working for them, were represented.
Age, contract type, or industry did not affect the one-way variance analysis. Spanish workers work more hours per week than their British counterparts. They were comparable demographically.
Both Spanish and English surveys were sent out. Back translation was employed since official Spanish copies of the original English scale were not accessible. All concerns were given a score between strongly disagree and strongly agree," unless otherwise specified.
A twelve-point scale made by Laschinger and checked by Jaimez Roman and Bretones was used to measure how much people liked the Constitution.
Each of the four pillars of structural empowerment—access to opportunity, knowledge, support, and resources—is represented by three elements on this scale. On a scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (greatly), participants rated their level of satisfaction. Since the factor loading for time available to achieve work requirements was below 0.60 and irrelevant across both samples, it was left out of the analyses.
Each of the four pillars of systematic approval—access to new chances, knowledge, support, and resources—is represented by three elements on this scale. On a scale from 1 to 5, members rated their level of satisfaction. Since the factor loading for time available to achieve work requirements was below 0.60 and irrelative in both trials, it was left out of the analyses.
Empowerment, a 12-item scale, and its Spanish translation were used to evaluate the dimensions of significance, skill, autonomy, and influence. Each subscale consists of three items. I take great pride in my work, I have the knowledge and skills required to perform it well, I am given considerable autonomy in deciding how to accomplish it, and I have a big impact inside my organization. Since the factor loading of one item on the irrelative sub-scale was not significantly different between the two samples, it was not included in the analyses.
Utrecht employee experience Scale, a 10-item questionnaire, surveyed workers to determine their level of contentment in their current positions. There are three items each for measuring vigour, dedication, and concentration on this scale.
The Wayne, Shore, and Liden five-item scale was used to evaluate withdrawal symptoms and relapse prevention. Statements like I am seriously considering leaving my job are examples of such items.
Williams and Anderson used the five items on this scale to judge how well subjects did on different tasks. One such statement could be, I do a good job with the tasks I've been given.
Specifically, five multivariate outliers were thrown away. The analysis was performed using Amos 25. First, the measurement models for all the samples were evaluated using confirmatory factor analyses. After that, we compared Spanish and British samples using multi-group confirmatory factor analyses. Tests of hypotheses were conducted using SEM. The covariance matrix was estimated using maximum likelihood. measurements were used as signs of latent variables across all experiments. As loading indicators, researchers used self- reported intentions to give up and overall productivity (Arbuckle, 2017).
To show that our proposed five-factor measurement model is valid, we compared it to several nested models in which indicators of both systematic and intellectual accreditation loaded on the same factor, one in which they loaded on separate factors, and three in which they loaded on separate factors.
Next, we looked at the concept of measurement invariance between the two samples from different countries. Having consistent underlying conceptions is vital for making international comparisons. In this study, we analysed the invariance of both configurations and metrics. By fitting a measurement model with no group limitations to the underlying factor structure, we may assess configuration invariance. A test for metric invariance was conducted by ensuring that all groups had the same factor loadings. Multigroup analyses and three models were utilized to assess the study's hypotheses. In the previous model, we tested the idea that psychological empowerment and workplace engagement may be mediated by structural empowerment. Using 2000 replicates of the observed sample and a 95 percent confidence interval with bias correction, we examined the potential for an indirect effect consistent with the hypothesis. When the confidence interval is larger than 0, it suggests that there are significant oblique effects (Aryee & Chen, 2006).
Using Bollen and Bentler's method, model fit was examined using several different metrics. The chi-square statistic, the Normed Fit Index, the Tucker-Lewis Index, the Comparative Fit Index, the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation, and Akaike's Information Criterion were all used to evaluate the goodness of fit of the models. Non-significant values suggest a good match. However, the results of this test depend on the size of the sample taken. GFI, NFI, TLI, and CFI scores over 0.90 indicate a very excellent match. Browne and Cudeck recommend a value of 0.05 for the RMSEA, while values closer to 0.06 are acceptable. The minimum acceptable SRMR value is 0.08. In non-nested models, the best-fitting model was chosen based on the lowest Akaike information criterion values. The invariance of layered models was compared using DC2 and DCFI. The measurement model is likely group invariant if the DC2 value is small. If the change in the goodness-of-fit index DCFI is more than 0.01 then there is no sample invariance, and the model has to be re-fit. DCFI is used to establish invariance instead of DC2, which is susceptible to sample size (Akaike, 1974).
Each sample's mean, standard deviation, average absolute value, and internal consistency are shown. Cronbach's alpha and the average validity of the scale for the whole scale and all subscales were both above 0.70. All possible correlations between the two sets of variables are shown. All predicted correlations materialized, with the vast majority being statistically notable at the 0.05 level or below.
Using a single factor test, in which all dimensions are loaded onto a single factor, we were able to determine whether the study was impacted by the common sort of bias generated by
the research technique. A few percentage points of the overall variation were found to be explained by a single component.
Using a five-factor measurement model, all but one of the factor loadings were greater than
0.70 and significant at the.001 level. It was determined that the standardized residuals were lower than 2.58. The results for Spain are as follows: c2-733.3, p.001; GFI - 0.88; NFI - 0.93; TLI - 0.93; CFI - 0.94; RMSEA - 0.07; SRMR - 0.05; and the results for the United Kingdom are as follows: c2 - 814.45, p.001; GFI - 0.87; NFI - 0.91; TLI - 0.91; CFI - 0. The next step revealed that the five-factor model provided a better match than the other nested models tested: the four-factor model Dc2 = 505.63, p.001, in Spain and Dc2 - 537.53, p.001, in the UK; the four-factor model Dc2 - 638.83, p.001, in Spain, and Dc2-14 493.1, p.001, in the UK.
The structural and psychological empowerment, job engagement, task performance, and quit intention were all components of the collectively cosmopolitan invariance model. The same concept is investigated using a multi-group configurable framework, but with no requirements for equality. Supporting configural invariance, this model had a high degree of goodness-of-fit to the data: c2 = 1547.75; p .001; GFI = 0.89; NFI = 0.92; TLI = 0.92; CFI = 0.94; RMSEA = 0.06; SRMR = 0.05. The configural invariance model was compared to the metric invariance model.
As suggested by Steenkamp and Baumgartner and Vandenberg and Lanch, we carefully confirmed which elements needed to be freely approximated to provide partial invariability. The customisable replica was compared to a newly constructed metric invariance model, and the factor loading for self-analysis was set at random. Partial measurement invariance was supported by the fact that neither the sample's DC2 nor DCFI value differed considerably from each other. Participants in both groups showed comparable levels of agreement with most items, but the self-determination component of the psychological empowerment scale was an exception.
The research hypotheses were evaluated using multigroup analysis. Age, length of service, hours worked, level of responsibility, and type of contract were the five demographic variables used to account for differences between the model and the real world. In the structural model, only age and executive status were shown to be significant controls. When analysing the relationship between structural accreditation and intention to resign, we controlled for executive position and age in multi-group research.
GFI = 0.91, NFI = 0.89, TLI = 0.92, CFI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.06, SRMR = 0.08, and AIC =
1802.28 are the relevant statistics. M1 was put next to two other models, one with traditional mediation and one with reversed causality. Excluding control variables did not affect the findings.
Structural and intellectual approval were positively associated with work commitment. Both levels of approval increased work engagement, supporting Hypotheses 1 and 2. In both samples, systematic approval led to intellectual approval.
Both samples highlighted the significance of direct and indirect routes. Both groups showed strong support for Hypothesis 3, which posits a strong indirect relationship between structural and psychological empowerment. Involvement in one's job was correlated negatively with the intention to resign and favourably with task performance across nations, lending credence to Hypotheses 4 and 5. The connection between structural and intellectual approval, retention, and productivity at the workplace is mediated by employees' level of involvement in their work.
Forecaster of task performance accounted for 18% of the difference in work engagement in Spain and 17% of the difference in the UK. On the other hand, M1 accounted for 69% of the difference in Spain and 70% of the difference in the UK. In the UK, there was a stronger link between psychological empowerment and how committed workers were to their jobs. Still, some routes weren't affected by the samples used. The theory of structural invariance is only partially supported.
This research compared the levels of empowerment experienced by Spanish and British workers and examined the role that psychological mandate played in the connection between structural mandate and job approval. The authors claim their research model is the first to combine structural and psychological forms of empowerment to better explain employee dedication on the job (Bakker, Albrecht & Leiter, 2011). Work involvement enhanced task performance and reduced quit intention, while psychological empowerment partly moderated this relationship. Both the Spanish and British samples followed this pattern, with the British sample showing a more robust positive correlation between psychological empowerment and job engagement. The consequences, both theoretical and practical, of this research are then discussed (Bakker, 2011).
First, the international research makes a significant contribution to the literature on empowerment and employee engagement by providing an explanation of how structural empowerment might boost engagement at work. Potentially underlying this is a process of psychological empowerment. Employees are more likely to feel empowered and engaged if they work in an empowering environment. Workers may stay put and get things done as a result. These results are consistent with other studies that have shown a correlation between employee engagement and positive business outcomes and lower rates of planned turnover. These results provide support for the idea that structural empowerment reduces burnout and boosts employee engagement, highlighting the importance of psychological empowerment in this inverse relationship (Wen, Huang & Teo, 2023).
Second, our results are in line with the theory and SDT because, like job resources, they satisfy fundamental human wants. This, in turn, gives workers a sense of psychological agency and makes them more engaged in and committed to their work. This investigation contributes to the nomological network of workplace engagement by delineating the link between structural and workplace accreditation from a psychological mandate perspective. Our research deepens the empirical understanding of the correlation between structural and psychological mandate and dedication to one's job.
Partial undeviating between the two nations' populations enhances the results, but full unvarying was not substantiated. There was little to no variation in the model's external validity measures, including factor loadings and structural pathways, across samples. Despite differences in working circumstances and social customs, the suggested model's structure was successfully replicated in Spain and the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom outperformed Spain on the road from psychological mandate to work engagement. Work motivation based on a sense of psychological agency may be more applicable in the individualistic British culture. That difference between cultures might be investigated.
This research shows that structural and intellectual approval can help make and keep a workforce that is invested. Our results suggest that consistent praise from superiors may increase workers' psychological agency. Systematic approval can be created through job pattern principles that comprise output of pertinent data, opportunities for professional development, helpful criticism, precise instructions, and sufficient time to complete responsibilities. Managers can foster a sense of intellectual approval through systematic approval by providing their staff with more discretion in the workplace, pushing them to stretch themselves, providing them with specific and attainable goals, and fostering an environment of collaboration and mutual support. Effective open communication tactics include team briefings and idea boxes.
The first step is for workers to assess the effectiveness of individual metrics. The conclusions of this study might stand to be tested in future studies using other, more objective metrics to evaluate their reliability. The second issue is that it is impossible to draw any conclusions about cause and effect from a cross-sectional study. It will be important for future research to contrast the proposed model with inverse causation hypotheses employing longitudinal designs. Also, in explaining job involvement, we did not account for employment and personal resources. Research into the progressive logic of structural and psychological accreditation as an explanation for employee engagement at work is crucial. The study's narrow focus on the service industry makes its findings less transferable. There were a wide range of services included in the samples. Scholars need to test the model in other settings to validate the results.
To sum up, systematic and intellectual accreditation are important precursors of job commitment among Spanish and British workers. Participation in work activities was associated with both task success and a lack of desire to leave the company. The positive correlation between structural empowerment and participation in the workplace was moderated by a sense of psychological empowerment. According to the research results, a company's competitive edge may be increased by encouraging employees' emotional and physical autonomy at work. More study is needed to explore the connections between organization autonomy, employee engagement, and their respective causes and effects.
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.
The authors are thankful to the institutional authority for completion of the work.
Agarwal, U. A., Datta, S., Blake‐Beard, S., & Bhargava, S. (2012). Linking LMX, innovative work behaviour and turnover intentions: The mediating role of work engagement. Career development international, 17(3), 208-230. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620431211241063
Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE transactions on automatic control, 19(6), 716-723. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705
Albasal, N. A., Eshah, N., Minyawi, H. E., Albashtawy, M., & Alkhawaldeh, A. (2022, July). Structural and psychological empowerment and organizational commitment among staff nurses in Jordan. In Nursing Forum (Vol. 57, No. 4, pp. 624-631). https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12721
Albar, M. J., García-Ramírez, M., Jiménez, A. M. L., & Garrido, R. (2012). Spanish adaptation of the scale of psychological empowerment in the workplace. The Spanish journal of psychology, 15(2), 793-800. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_SJOP.2012.v15.n2.38891
Albrecht, S. L., & Andreetta, M. (2011). The influence of empowering leadership, empowerment and engagement on affective commitment and turnover intentions in community health service workers: Test of a model. Leadership in health services, 24(3), 228-237. https://doi.org/10.1108/17511871111151126
Amor, A. M., Vázquez, J. P. A., & Faíña, J. A. (2020). Transformational leadership and work engagement: Exploring the mediating role of structural empowerment. European Management Journal, 38(1), 169-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2019.06.007
Amor, A. M., Xanthopoulou, D., Calvo, N., & Vázquez, J. P. A. (2021). Structural empowerment, psychological empowerment, and work engagement: A cross-country study. European Management Journal, 39(6), 779-789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2021.01.005
Arbuckle, J. L. (2017). Amos 25.0 user’s guide. Chicago: IBM SPSS.
Aryee, S., & Chen, Z. X. (2006). Leader–member exchange in a Chinese context: Antecedents, the mediating role of psychological empowerment and outcomes. Journal of business research, 59(7), 793-801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2005.03.003
Avolio, B. J., Zhu, W., Koh, W., & Bhatia, P. (2004). Transformational leadership and organizational commitment: Mediating role of psychological empowerment and moderating role of structural distance. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 25(8), 951-968. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.283
Bagozzi, R. P., & Heatherton, T. F. (1994). A general approach to representing multifaceted personality constructs: Application to state self‐esteem. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 1(1), 35-67. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519409539961
Bakker, A. B. (2011). An evidence-based model of work engagement. Current directions in psychological science, 20(4), 265-269. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411414534
Bakker, A. B., & Bal, M. P. (2010). Weekly work engagement and performance: A study among starting teachers. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 83(1), 189- 206. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317909X402596
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2008). Towards a model of work engagement. Career development international, 13(3), 209-223. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620430810870476
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2017). Job demands–resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward. Journal of occupational health psychology, 22(3), 273–285. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000056
Bakker, A. B., Albrecht, S. L., & Leiter, M. P. (2011). Key questions regarding work engagement. European journal of work and organizational psychology, 20(1), 4-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2010.485352
Faisal-E-Alam, M., & Nahar, A. A. (2022). Employee Satisfaction and Its’ Impact on Organizational Commitment: A Resource Based Approach. International Journal on Recent Trends in Business and Tourism (IJRTBT), 6(2), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.31674/ijrtbt.2022.v06i02.001
Wen, J., Huang, S. S., & Teo, S. (2023). Effect of empowering leadership on work engagement via psychological empowerment: Moderation of cultural orientation. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 54, 88-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2022.12.012