Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gvh9x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T12:50:01.906Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Understanding New Era Workplace Relationships: Insights From Employee Engagement Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 September 2018

Patrick Hyland ,
Anthony W. Caputo  and
David Reeves
Patrick Hyland*
Affiliation:
Research & Development, Mercer|Sirota
Anthony W. Caputo
Affiliation:
Research & Development, Mercer|Sirota
David Reeves
Affiliation:
Consulting, Mercer|Sirota
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Patrick Hyland, Mercer|Sirota, 1050 Connecticut Avenue, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20036. E-mail: patrick.hyland@mercer.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In their focal article, Chernyak-Hai and Rabenu (2018) argue that the foundational assumptions of social exchange theory (SET) should be revisited and revised because of recent changes in the workplace and the workforce. Using employee engagement data from recent research projects conducted in applied settings, we investigated a series of questions based on Chernyak-Hai and Rabenu's working hypotheses.

Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 11 , Issue 3 , September 2018 , pp. 523 - 530
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Chernyak-Hai, L., & Rabenu, E. (2018). The new era workplace relationships: Is social exchange theory still relevant? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 11 (3), 456–481.Google Scholar
Costanza, D. P., & Finkelstein, L. M. (2015). Generationally based differences: Is there a there there? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 8 (3), 308–323.Google Scholar
Bryan, C. J., & Hershfield, H. E. (2011). You owe it to yourself: Boosting retirement saving with a responsibility-based appeal. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 429–432.Google Scholar
Kahn, W. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692–724.Google Scholar
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397–422.Google Scholar
Myers, K. K., & Sadaghiani, K. (2010). Millennials in the workplace: A communication perspective on millennials’ organizational relationships and performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25 (2), 225–238. doi: 10.1007/s10869-010-9172-7Google Scholar
Porath, C., Spreitzer, G., Gibson, C., & Garnett, F. G. (2011). Thriving at work: Toward its measurement, construct validation, and theoretical refinement. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 250–275.Google Scholar
Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21, 600–619.Google Scholar
Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma, 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.Google Scholar
Shragay, D., & Tziner, A. 2011. The generational effects on the relationship between job involvement, work satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behavior. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1885047.Google Scholar
Urminsky, O. (2017). The role of psychological connectedness to the future self in decisions over time. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26, 34–39.Google Scholar
Wrzesniewski, A., McCauley, C. R., Rozin, P., & Schwartz, B. (1997). Jobs, careers, and callings: People's relations to their work. Journal of Research in Personality, 31, 21–33.Google Scholar