Content uploaded by Abror Abror
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Abror Abror on Jan 08, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Available via license: CC BY-NC 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Employee Engagement, Satisfaction and Loyalty: Preliminary Findings
Syahrizal Syahrizal1, Dina Patrisia2, Abror Abror3
1Universitas Negeri Padang, Padang, Indonesia, syahrizal@fe.unp.ac.id
2Universitas Negeri Padang, Padang, Indonesia, patrisiadina@yahoo.com
3Universitas Negeri Padang, Padang, Indonesia, abror094@gmail.com
Abstract
Employee loyalty is an important factor in managing the organisation such as a university.
There are some antecedents of employee loyalty, such as employee engagement and job
satisfaction. This study examines the relationship between employee engagements, job
satisfaction and employee loyalty. This preliminary study has been conducted in a
university in Indonesia. We employed lecturers of one state university in West Sumatera as
the sample of study. We used Structural Equation Model (SEM) Partial Least Square (PLS)
with Smart PLS 3 as the data analysis software package. This study found that employee
engagement has a significant impact on job satisfaction. There is no significant direct effect
of employee engagement on employee loyalty. Surprisingly, we also found that employee
engagement has a significant mediating impact on the link between employee engagement
and employee loyalty. Furthermore, some limitations and future research are discussed.
Keywords: employee engagement, job satisfaction, employee loyalty, structural equation
model (SEM), partial least square (PLS)
Introduction
The higher education sector becomes a highly competitive sector nowadays (Asrar-ul-Haq et al.,
2017). University as one of the higher education entities has to develop innovative programmes, such
as digital based service quality, which might create a better competitive advantage. One important
factor in creating a competitive advantage is human resource management. One of the human
resources in a university is lecturer. There are some indicators of the quality of lecturer. For example,
we can see the quality of the lecturer in his/her ability to teach and his/her loyalty to the university.
Universitas Negeri Padang (UNP) as one of the state universities in Indonesia has also faced the
competition problem. It has to survive and retain its customers. Today UNP has 1125 lecturers and
405 supporting staffs with more than 35,000 enrolled students. One problem in the universities such
as UNP right now is the lecturer’s loyalty. According to Ineson et al. (2013) there are several
influenced factors of employee loyalty, such as employee satisfaction and engagement.
Furthermore, employee satisfaction is not an instant result. Some previous studies have asserted
that there are several antecedents of employee satisfaction, such as employee engagement and self-
efficacy (De Simone et al., 2018, Perera et al., 2018, Suhartanto et al., 2018). Recently, the university’s
management has a program to change the university’s mindset from the teacher’s university to the
research university. This program is in line with the performance contract between rector and the
Directorate General of Higher Education and it will be followed by the contract between rector and
deans in Universitas Negeri Padang. Accordingly to achieve this vision, it should be followed by the
loyalty of lecturer to participate in achieving the university’s vision. However, study on employee
loyalty is still neglected, hence, this study aims to investigate the link between employee loyalty and
its antecedents, including employee engagement and employee satisfaction.
Employee Loyalty
Employee loyalty refers to an employee’s feeling of attachment to his/her employer (Masakure,
2016). According to Ineson et al. (2013), there are some antecedents of employee loyalty, such as
employee commitment, personal satisfaction, work environment, social benefit and monetary
rewards. Furthermore, Lee et al. (2017), Longo and Mura (2011) dan Bhattacharya (2015) assert that
employee will stay in the company when he/she satisfied with his/her job. Employee loyalty can be
Third International Conference On Economics Education, Economics, Business and Management, Accounting and Entrepreneurship (PICEEBA 2019)
Copyright © 2019, the Authors. Published by Atlantis Press.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).
Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 97
713
measured by using some items, including (1) want to do the job more than the organisation
expectation to make sure the organisation successfulness (2) want to make the company as his/her
own carrier (3) care with the organization condition (4) want to stay in the organization (Jun et al.,
2006).
Employee Satisfaction
Employee satisfaction becomes an important factor because managements’ view on human
resource has changed. In the past, they argued that human resource is only a cost for the company;
whilst, today they assert that human resource is an asset for the business. Some previous studies also
argue that employees may become a competitive advantage which is not easy to imitate by the
competitor (Suhartanto et al., 2018). When the employees satisfied with the company, they will do
their best and it will increase the company’s performance (De Simone et al., 2018). Employee
satisfaction refers to the employee’s feeling about the job based on his/her experience (like or dislike)
(Drydakis, 2017, Asrar-ul-Haq et al., 2017, Coetzee and Stoltz, 2015). Some prior studies argue that
employee satisfaction has some antecedents, such as self-efficacy, employee engagement and social
support (De Simone et al., 2018, Orgambídez-Ramos and de Almeida, 2017, Malinen and Savolainen,
2016). Employee satisfaction has also related to some consequences such as employee loyalty and
organizational citizenship behavior (Ocampo et al., 2018, Xie et al., 2017, Ineson et al., 2013). In
addition, according to Xie et al. (2017), employee satisfaction can be measured by using some
indicators, such as overall satisfaction of the job.
Employee Engagement
Employee engagement is a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by
vigor, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli et al., 2002). It relates to the positive emotional
relationship between employees and their job (Orgambídez-Ramos and de Almeida, 2017).
Accordingly, employee engagement has three main dimensions, including vigor, dedication and
absorption (Orgambídez-Ramos and de Almeida, 2017, Lu et al., 2018). Furthermore, Albrecht and
Marty (2017) have asserted that employee engagement has a close relationship with the psychological
factor, such as satisfaction which has an impact on employee’s performance. Cahill et al. (2015) also
argue that employee engagement will affect the employee’s work-life balance. Albrecht and Marty
(2017) argue that employee engagement can be measured by using four indicators, such as “my job
inspires me”.
Some prior studies have found that employee engagement has a relationship with employee
satisfaction (De Simone et al., 2018, Orgambídez-Ramos and de Almeida, 2017, Ocampo et al., 2018).
For example, Orgambídez-Ramos and de Almeida (2017) have revealed that employee engagement is
one significant antecedent of employee satisfaction. They have conducted their study to 215 nursing
professionals in Portugal. In line with Orgambídez-Ramos and de Almeida (2017), Suhartanto et al.
(2018) have also found that employee satisfaction is influenced by employee engagement. They
studies 408 frontline staffs of retail stores. Moreover, Perera et al. (2018) have investigated 574
teachers in Australia. By using Structural Equation Modeling as the data analysis tools they found
that the teachers’ satisfaction with their job is affected by the teachers’ engagement. Therefore from
the discussion above, we propose a hypothesis that employee engagement has a positive and
significant impact on employee satisfaction (H1).
Employee Engagement and Employee Loyalty
Employee engagement is also related to employee loyalty (Milliman et al., 2018, Karatepe and
Ngeche, 2012, De Simone et al., 2018, Salmela-Aro and Upadyaya, 2018). Milliman et al. (2018) and
Karatepe and Ngeche (2012) have asserted that employee engagement has a relationship with job
embeddedness. When an employee engages with his/her job in the company, he/she will have a better
job embeddedness, whilst, job embeddedness is related to the employee loyalty. Moreover Shahpouri
et al. (2016) have examined the mediating role of work engagement on the link between job resources
Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 97
714
and turn over intention. They found that work engagement has a significant impact on turn over
intention. On the other hand, turn over intention relates to employee loyalty. Hence, we argue that
employee engagement has a direct impact on employee loyalty. Therefore, we posit that employee
engagement is a significant and positive antecedent of employee loyalty (H2).
Employee Satisfaction and Employee Loyalty
Several previous studies have revealed that employee satisfaction has a significant and positive
influence on employee loyalty (Collins et al., 2014, Masakure, 2016, Ineson et al., 2013). Masakure
(2016) argues that the employees will be loyal to the organisation when they satisfied with their job
and the work environment. Moreover, in marketing context, the prior studies also found that
customer satisfaction will have a positive effect on customer loyalty (Han et al., 2017). Hence, we
argue that employee satisfaction has a significant and positive impact on employee loyalty (H3).
Methods
Sampling and Data Collection Procedures
This preliminary study has been conducted in a state university in Padang West Sumatera. It is a
part of the main study where the study’s population is all permanent lecturers in this university.
However, we have employed only 30 respondents as the samples for this preliminary study. For the
data collection, we used several steps: First, we sent the questionnaires to 30 lecturers who agreed to
participate in this study. Second, we input the data to the SPSS software program.
Measurement
This study has employed three constructs (i.e., employee engagement, employee satisfaction and
employee loyalty). We adopted the measurement for employee engagement from Albrecht and Marty
(2017). The sample of items from this construct is “at my job I feel strong and vigorous”. The
employee satisfaction construct has been adopted from Xie et al. (2017) and Messersmith et al. (2011).
The example of the measurement items is “All things considered, I feel pretty good about this job.”
Finally, the employee loyalty construct has been measured by using three loyalty indicators from Jun
et al. (2006). We employed Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) PLS with Smart PLS-3 to analyse the
data (Hair et al., 2014)
However, before the main analysis, we have done some preliminary tests, such as normality,
heteroschedasticity, multicollinearity and outlier test (Wardi et al., 2018b, Patrisia and Dastgir, 2017)
Result and Discussion
Result
This study has analysed the data by using SEM PLS. However, before the main analysis, we have
conducted some prior tests. For example we examined the validity and reliability of the data. Table 1
shows the construct validity and reliability. We found all the constructs are valid (the Average
Variance Extracted values are ≥ 0.50) and reliable based on two values ( Cronbach’s alpha and
Construct Reliability ≥ 0.70) (Abror and Akamavi, 2015, Wardi et al., 2018a).
Table 1 Construct validity and Reliability
Variable
Cronbach’s
Alpha
Rho
A
CR
AVE
Employee Loyalty
0.91
0.92
0.95
0.85
Employee Satisfaction
0.91
0.97
0.94
0.84
Employee Engagement
0.90
0.90
0.93
0.78
CR= Construct Reliability, AVE= Average Variance Extracted
Moreover, we have also examined the discriminant validity of the constructs by using the square
root of AVE. Table 2 shows the value of square root of AVE in the diagonal should be greater than the
correlation (Hair et al., 2013).
Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 97
715
Table 2 Discriminant Validity
Variable
1
2
3
Employee Loyalty
0.92
Employee Satisfaction
0.72
0.92
Employee Engagement
0.63
0.70
0.88
Note: Diagonal is the square root of AVE
The primary analysis in Table 3 has revealed that the employee engagement has a positive and
significant effect on employee satisfaction (H1). Moreover, the employee engagement has not
significantly affected the employee loyalty (H2). Finally, we also found that employee satisfaction has
a positive and significant impact on the employee loyalty (H3). Surprisingly, even though employee
engagement has no significant direct impact on employee loyalty, it has a significant indirect effect on
employee loyalty through employee satisfaction as a mediator. This finding has been tested by using
Sobel’s Test with significant value 0.005 (< 0.05). for the research model please see Figure 1.
Table 3 Hypothesis Testing
Hypothesis
Coefficient
T
Statistic
P
Value
EmpSat -> EmpLoy
0.55
2.78
0.01
Engage -> EmpLoy
0.24
1.20
0.23
Engage -> EmpSat
0.70
6.76
0.00
Figure 1 Research Model
Discussion
The findings of this study revealed that employee engagement has a significant influence on
employee satisfaction (H1). This finding reflects the previous findings, such as Orgambídez-Ramos
and de Almeida (2017); Ocampo et al. (2018) and Suhartanto et al. (2018) who have examined the link
between employee engagement and employee satisfaction. They argue that when an employee is
engaged with the company, it will affect his/her satisfaction. Accordingly, to make sure that the
employees have a high employee satisfaction, the company has to concern with the engagement
programs. Moreover, Perera et al. (2018) have highlighted that the teacher’s satisfaction has been
affected by the teacher’s engagement. Therefore, employee engagement is a significant and positive
antecedent of employee satisfaction.
The findings highlight that employee engagement has not significantly impacted the employee
loyalty (H2). This finding is not in the lines with some prior studies (Milliman et al., 2018, Karatepe
and Ngeche, 2012, Shahpouri et al., 2016) who argue that employee engagement has a significant
impact on employee loyalty. However, although the employee engagement has no significant direct
Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 97
716
impact on employee loyalty, it has a significant indirect impact through employee satisfaction as the
mediating variable. Therefore, to increase employee loyalty, the company has to address the
employee engagement, hence, it will have a positive impact on employee satisfaction as a significant
antecedent of employee loyalty.
Finally, we found that employee satisfaction is a significant and positive antecedent of employee
loyalty (H3). This finding is congruent with several prior studies (Masakure, 2016, Ineson et al., 2013).
For instance, Han et al. (2017) and Masakure (2016) have asserted that satisfaction is an antecedent of
loyalty. Therefore, when an employee is satisfied with his/her job, he/she will be loyal to the
organisation. The employees will show their loyalty with some indicators, such as do their job
seriously and want to recommend the organisation to other people.
Conclusions
In conclusion, we have revealed some important findings; including there is a significant direct
effect of employee engagement on employee satisfaction. We also found that employee satisfaction
has a significant impact on employee loyalty. Finally, even though there is no significant direct impact
of employee engagement on employee loyalty, surprisingly, we found a significant direct impact on
that relationship through employee satisfaction as the mediator. Furthermore, this research also has
some limitations, such as the number of samples is still small, hence, for the main study, we suggest
to use a larger sample size. This study has only been conducted in one university and for future
study, it can be extended to some universities in Indonesia to get more generalize results. Finally, this
study only focused on employee engagement and satisfaction as the antecedents of employee loyalty.
For future research, it can be expanded to some new variables, such as self-efficacy and
Organisational Citizenship behaviour (OCB).
References
Abror & Akamavi, R. K. 2015. Psychological safety and organisational performance in indonesian
companies: Preliminary findings. Applied psychology. World Scientific.
Albrecht, S. L. & Marty, A. 2017. Personality, self-efficacy and job resources and their associations
with employee engagement, affective commitment and turnover intentions. The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 1-25.
Asrar-ul-Haq, M., Kuchinke, K. P. & Iqbal, A. 2017. The relationship between corporate social
responsibility, job satisfaction, and organisational commitment: Case of pakistani higher
education. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 2352-2363.
Bhattacharya, Y. 2015. Employee engagement as a predictor of seafarer retention: A study among
indian officers. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 31, 295-318.
Cahill, K. E., McNamara, T. K., Pitt-Catsouphes, M. & Valcour, M. 2015. Linking shifts in the national
economy with changes in job satisfaction, employee engagement and work–life balance. Journal
of Behavioural and Experimental Economics, 56, 40-54.
Coetzee, M. & Stoltz, E. 2015. Employees' satisfaction with retention factors: Exploring the role of
career adaptability. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 89, 83-91.
Collins, B. J., Burrus, C. J. & Meyer, R. D. 2014. Gender differences in the impact of leadership styles
on subordinate embeddedness and job satisfaction. The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 660-671.
De Simone, S., Planta, A. & Cicotto, G. 2018. The role of job satisfaction, work engagement, self-
efficacy and agentic capacities on nurses' turnover intention and patient satisfaction. Applied
Nursing Research, 39, 130-140.
Drydakis, N. 2017. Trans employees, transitioning, and job satisfaction. Journal of Vocational Behaviour,
98, 1-16.
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. & Sarstedt, M. 2013. A primer on partial least squares structural
equation modeling (pls-sem), SAGE Publications.
Hair , J. F. J., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L. & G. Kuppelwieser, V. 2014. Partial least squares structural
equation modeling (pls-sem). European Business Review, 26, 106-121.
Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 97
717
Han, H., Meng, B. & Kim, W. 2017. Bike-traveling as a growing phenomenon: Role of attributes,
value, satisfaction, desire, and gender in developing loyalty. Tourism Management, 59, 91-103.
Ineson, E. M., Benke, E. & László, J. 2013. Employee loyalty in hungarian hotels. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 32, 31-39.
Jun, M., Cai, S. & Shin, H. 2006. Tqm practice in maquiladora: Antecedents of employee satisfaction
and loyalty. Journal of Operations Management, 24, 791-812.
Karatepe, O. M. & Ngeche, R. N. 2012. Does job embeddedness mediate the effect of work
engagement on job outcomes? A study of hotel employees in cameroon. Journal of Hospitality
Marketing & Management, 21, 440-461.
Lee, T. W., Hom, P., Eberly, M. & Li, J. 2017. Managing employee retention and turnover with 21st
century ideas. Organisational Dynamics.
Longo, M. & Mura, M. 2011. The effect of intellectual capital on employees’ satisfaction and retention.
Information & Management, 48, 278-287.
Lu, X., Xie, B. & Guo, Y. 2018. The trickle-down of work engagement from leader to follower: The
roles of optimism and self-efficacy. Journal of Business Research, 84, 186-195.
Malinen, O.-P. & Savolainen, H. 2016. The effect of perceived school climate and teacher efficacy in
behaviour management on job satisfaction and burnout: A longitudinal study. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 60, 144-152.
Masakure, O. 2016. The effect of employee loyalty on wages. Journal of Economic Psychology, 56, 274-
298.
Messersmith, J. G., Patel, P. C., Lepak, D. P. & Gould-Williams, J. 2011. Unlocking the black box:
Exploring the link between high-performance work systems and performance. J Appl Psychol,
96, 1105-18.
Milliman, J., Gatling, A. & Kim, J. 2018. The effect of workplace spirituality on hospitality employee
engagement, intention to stay, and service delivery. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism
Management, 35, 56-65.
Ocampo, L. A., Tan, T. A. G. & Sia, L. A. 2018. Using fuzzy dematel in modeling the causal
relationships of the antecedents of organisational citizenship behaviour (ocb) in the hospitality
industry: A case study in the philippines. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 34, 11-
29.
Orgambídez-Ramos, A. & de Almeida, H. 2017. Work engagement, social support, and job
satisfaction in portuguese nursing staff: A winning combination. Applied Nursing Research, 36,
37-41.
Patrisia, D. & Dastgir, S. 2017. Diversification and corporate social performance in manufacturing
companies. Eurasian Business Review, 7, 121-139.
Perera, H. N., Granziera, H. & McIlveen, P. 2018. Profiles of teacher personality and relations with
teacher self-efficacy, work engagement, and job satisfaction. Personality and Individual
Differences, 120, 171-178.
Salmela-Aro, K. & Upadyaya, K. 2018. Role of demands-resources in work engagement and burnout
in different career stages. Journal of Vocational Behaviour.
Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-romá, V. & Bakker, A. B. 2002. The measurement of
engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of
Happiness Studies, 3, 71-92.
Shahpouri, S., Namdari, K. & Abedi, A. 2016. Mediating role of work engagement in the relationship
between job resources and personal resources with turnover intention among female nurses.
Applied Nursing Research, 30, 216-221.
Suhartanto, D., Dean, D., Nansuri, R. & Triyuni, N. N. 2018. The link between tourism involvement
and service performance: Evidence from frontline retail employees. Journal of Business Research,
83, 130-137.
Wardi, Y., Abror, A. & Trinanda, O. 2018a. Halal tourism: Antecedent of tourist’s satisfaction and
word of mouth (wom). Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 23, 463-472.
Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 97
718
Wardi, Y., Susanto, P., Abror, A. & Abdullah, N. L. 2018b. Impact of entrepreneurial proclivity on
firm performance: The role of market and technology turbulence Pertanika J Soc. Sci. & Hum, 26,
241-250.
Xie, B., Zhou, W., Huang, J. L. & Xia, M. 2017. Using goal facilitation theory to explain the
relationships between calling and organisation-directed citizenship behaviour and job
satisfaction. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 100, 78-87.
Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 97
719