Work environments affect Employee Engagement in the Hospitality Industry

As Anitha (2019) points out, there is a substantial relationship between employee engagement and the work environment. Workplace conditions significantly affect whether employees want to continue working in any organization. The pool may attract new candidates to involve in positions that must meet a safe and suitable work environment. On the other hand, the work environment plays a critical role as individuals want to work and operate in a safe and pleasing workplace. Previous studies have demonstrated that this work environment is an element that may use to decide the level of engagement of each employee performing in the organization. According to Miles et al (2019), his study revealed that different aspects of the work environment might lead to different levels of employee work engagement. Organizations that fulfil their roles and indicate their concern for employees' feelings and needs offer positive feedback, allow every employee to know their issues, develop new abilities and skills, and solve work-related issues are represented as management that promotes a supportive work environment. Indeed, Kahn (2021) found that trusting and supportive interpersonal relationships and supportive management promote psychological safety. Corporate members felt safer in work environments characterized by openness and cooperation. Supportive environments let members experiment, try new operations or things, and fail without fear of consequences. Work environment affects employee engagement. In addition, recent studies show that a meaningful work environment is regarded to be the main criterion of employee engagement (McLeod, 2007).

Working within a set environment, it is important that the employees are motivated to do so. Hence employee engagement is drawn from the concept of many old psychological theories of motivation. One of the well-used theories is Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. The well-known pyramid, designed by psychologist Abraham Maslow, classified human needs in terms of significance. Basic wants like food and shelter are at the base of the pyramid, while less urgent demands like self-actualization are at the top (Maslow, and Lewis, 1987).  The most fundamental requirements must first be met in order to satisfy the wants at the top of the pyramid. An employee cannot perform to their greatest capacity without help and protection (McLeod, 2007).

Hertzberg's two-factor theory divides working conditions into two main categories: those that contribute to workplace satisfaction and those that contribute to workplace discontent. It is also known as the motivation-hygiene theory and the dual-factor theory. According to Hertzberg, employee satisfaction is influenced by motivators, or psychological and emotional elements, like autonomy, the chance for personal growth, demanding work, and acknowledgement (Ewen, et al 1966). Employee unhappiness is also influenced by hygienic variables, or physical circumstances, like the office environment, compensation and perks, and management style. According to Hertzberg's thesis, an employer must deliberately focus on both hygiene and motivators and avoid assuming that enhancing one will inevitably have an impact on the other (Lindsay, et al, 1967).

Expectancy theory of Vroom According to the expectation theory, a person decides how to act based on the expected outcome of that action. Victor Vroom outlined the theory's three components which include the idea that making an effort can result in a specific result. This factor is influenced by the worker's self-assurance, how challenging they think the goal is going to be, and how in charge and autonomous they feel. It also considers the notion that the person will receive a reward for attaining the goal, such as cash, recognition, status, or self-satisfaction and workers need to believe that the reward justifies the additional effort or that the reward justifies the effort. The person can assess how well the organization's goal fits with their own requirements and ambitions (Heneman and Schwab, 1972).

The extent to which leaders and the work environment embraced these theories and assimilated the concepts into the workplace can be seen in the fact that some of the ideas in this article may feel like common knowledge.

Many of these ideas are already second nature, but only as a result of decades of widespread implementation by organizations. Even yet, it's crucial to go back over the work and comprehend the fundamental ideas because these theories offer a framework for a knowledgeable, wiser approach to employee engagement (Teo, et al, 2020).

Hence it is important to create a team-oriented workspace on the organization's digital workplace platform. The work environment is encouraged to utilize open workspaces, paired with the practice that would accommodate people that will work remotely. It is also advisable to automate mundane but essential processes. A digital workplace platform may help employees address all requirements swiftly by simplifying and automating monotonous but vital tasks (Ram et al, 2011).

As through is TalentMap (2017), the working conditions and atmosphere under which employees work, significantly affect their productivity, engagement and efficiency.  A multitude of factors like team building activities, voice, employees' insurance provisions, career advancement, work-life balance, rewards & appreciation, disciplinary measures and compensation defines their work environment.  It touches on health & safety at the workplace by extension, especially regarding the lighting and ventilation of the office, the eco-friendliness of chemicals utilized, the quality of employee training, and slip & fall prevention measures.  The scales could be significantly tilted owing to the efficiency of different equipment and tools at the workplace, as far as their suitability is concerned.

Friendships such as team building activities at the workplace are stimulated by a favorable work environment which helps minimize office politics and conflicts.   Friendship encourages collaboration and cooperation between subordinates, bosses and colleagues.  This eventually leads to individual career excellence as collaboration in turn enhances individual efficiency and productivity.   The entire team is enriched with mutual appreciation and respect for each other’s input when everyone excels in their line of work, and this benefits both the company as well as individual staff members (TalentMap, 2017).

Spence, A. (2021/22); shares that the Aitken Spence hotels consider the employees a part of a community where a specific task is fulfilled by each member, serving the community as a whole.  For the purpose of encouraging this community spirit amongst employees, any activity from taking the team out for lunch to organizing an annual event helps.   It is more conducive to maintaining a certain level of unbiasedness and equality notwithstanding the level of hierarchy in the company, where each member feels essential to the community. This is a typical new-age technology in startups where a no-walls, more casual organizational policy is adopted, and although tricky, sustaining this new business could lead to highly engaged employees which is a part of the nurturing stage of human capital management.  Each human asset acquired by the group of hotels was polished and fostered to assist in the hotel’s long-term development.  Whether the group of hotels sponsors higher education for its employees or running a proprietary training program, it is not only investing in its future but also creating a sense of loyalty amongst its employees (Spence A(2021/22).

Reference

•  Anitha, J. (2014). Determinants of employee engagement and their impact on employee performance. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management
• Ewen, R.B., Smith, P.C. and Hulin, C.L., 1966. An empirical test of the herzberg two-factor theory. Journal of applied psychology, 50(6), p.544.
• Heneman, H.G. and Schwab, D.P., 1972. Evaluation of research on expectancy theory predictions of employee performance. Psychological bulletin, 78(1), p.1.
• Kahn, W. A. (2021). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of management journal, 33(4), 692-724.
• Lee, S., (2007). Vroom's expectancy theory and the public library customer motivation model. Library Review.
• Lindsay, C.A., Marks, E. and Gorlow, L., (1967). The Herzberg Theory: A critique and reformulation.
• Maslow, A. and Lewis, K.J., (1987). Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Salenger Incorporated, 14(17), pp.987-990.
• McLeod, S., (2007). Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Simply psychology, 1(1-18).
• Miles, E. L., Andresen, S., Carlin, E. M., Skjærseth, J. B., Underdal, A., &Wettestad, J. (2019). Environmental regime effectiveness: confronting theory with evidence. Mit Press
• Ram, P. and Prabhakar, G.V., (2011).
• Spence, A. (2021/22). EUNOIA A PURPOSE REDEFINED. [online] Available at: https://cdn.cse.lk/cmt/upload_report_file/521_1654595513955.pdf.
• TalentMap (2017). FROM EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT TO EMPLOYEE EXPERIENCE. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mi4_c_b6AyE [Accessed 22 Jul. 2020].
• Teo, S.T., Bentley, T. and Nguyen, D., (2020). Psychosocial work environment, work engagement, and employee commitment: A moderated, mediation model. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 88, p.102415.