Job Performance Prognosis: Evaluating Work Engagement, Workaholism, and Self-Efficacy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55908/sdgs.v11i11.1996Keywords:
entrepreneurial performance, work engagement, workaholism, self-efficacy, innovative behaviour, business growth, business successAbstract
Purpose: The present study attempts to investigate work engagement, workaholism and self-efficacy towards entrepreneurial performance among the entrepreneurs of Saudi Arabia. Theoretical framework: The study integrates work engagement, workaholism, and self-efficacy in predicting job performance. Besides, the relationship between self-efficacy and work engagement in the presence of workaholism and job performance has yet to be thoroughly explored.
Design/Methodology/ Approach: The study is quantitatively based on cross-sectional data. A survey questionnaire is applied to get a response from the entrepreneurs through snowball sampling. In total, 450 survey questionnaires were distributed. In return, we received 280 with a response rate of 62%.
Findings: By employing the structural equation model (SEM), the study found a significant effect of work engagement on innovative behaviour, business growth and subjective business success. Further, self-efficacy significantly predicts innovative behaviour, business growth, subjective business success and work engagement. On the other hand, workaholism has a significant negative predictor of innovative behaviour, business growth, and subjective business success.
Research, practical and social implications: The empirical proof of the study would deepen the new insights for the conceptualization of entrepreneurship performance in a developing context. The study may fill the gaps at a global level for understanding the factors of entrepreneurship performance among entrepreneurs.
Originality/ value: The definite link between self-efficacy and work engagement may offer new insight into the entrepreneurship and management literature. The outcomes of the study offer a shred of empirical evidence for entrepreneurial performance through work engagement, workaholism and self-efficacy.
References
Abdelwahed, N. A. A., Soomro, B. A., & Shah, N. (2023). Predicting employee performance through transactional leadership and entrepreneur's passion among the employees of Pakistan. Asia Pacific Management Review, 28(1), 60-68.
Abdelwahed, N.A.A., Soomro, B.A., Shah, N., & Saraih, U.N. (2022). Effect of institutional support and entrepreneurial knowledge on women’s entrepreneurial self-efficacy and venture performance in a developing country. International Journal of Innovation Science, https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-12-2021-0218
Aboramadan, M., Hamid, Z., Kundi, Y. M., & El Hamalawi, E. (2022). The effect of servant leadership on employees' extra‐role behaviors in NPOs: The role of work engagement. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 33(1), 109-129.
Adeel, S., Daniel, A. D., & Botelho, A. (2023). The effect of entrepreneurship education on the determinants of entrepreneurial behaviour among higher education students: A multi-group analysis. Journal of Innovation and Knowledge, 8(1), 100324.
Agarwal, A. U. (2014). Examining the impact of social exchange relationships on innovative work behaviour: role of work engagement. Team Performance Management, 20(3/4), 102-120.
Agarwal, A. U. (2014). Linking justice, trust and innovative work behaviour to work engagement. Personnel Review, 43(1), 41-73.
Aksoy, C., & Yalçinsoy, A. (2018). Investigation of the relationship between job performance, burnout and workaholism. Journal of Business Research-Turk, 10(3), 53-64.
Al Badi, F.M., Cherian, J., Farouk, S., & Al Nahyan, M. (2023). Work engagement and job performance among nurses in the public healthcare sector in the United Arab Emirates. Journal of Asia Business Studies, https://doi.org/10.1108/JABS-06-2022-0216
Albrecht, S. L., & Marty, A. (2020). Personality, self-efficacy and job resources and their associations with employee engagement, affective commitment and turnover intentions. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(5), 657-681.
Alessandri, G., Consiglio, C., Luthans, F., & Borgogni, L. (2018). Testing a dynamic model of the impact of psychological capital on work engagement and job performance. Career Development International, 23(1), 33-47.
Bakker, A.B., & Bal, P.M. (2010). Weekly work engagement and performance: a study among starting teachers. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83, 189-206.
Bakker, A.B., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2009). The crossover of daily work engagement: test of an actor-partner interdependence model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1562-1571.
Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E., & Burke, R. (2009). Workaholism and relation quality: a spillover-crossover perspective. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 14, 23-33.
Bandura, A. (1997), Self-efficacy in changing societies, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
Basit, A. (2019). Examining how respectful engagement affects task performance and affective organizational commitment: the role of job engagement. Personnel Review, 48(3), 644-658.
Baum, J.R., & Locke, E.A. (2004). The relation of entrepreneurial traits, skill, and motivation to subsequent venture growth. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 587-598.
Bhatti, M.K., Soomro, B.A., & Shah, N. (2022). Predictive power of training design on employee performance: an empirical approach in Pakistan's health sector. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 71(8), 3792-3808.
Carter, N. M., Gartner, W. B., Shaver, K. G., & Gatewood, E. J. (2003). The career reasons of nascent entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(1), 13-40.
Carter, W. R., Nesbit, P. L., Badham, R.J., Parker, S.K., & Sung, L. (2016). The effects of employee engagement and self-efficacy on job performance: a longitudinal field study. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 29(17), 2483-2502.
Chaurasia, S., & Shukla, A. (2013). The influence of leader-member exchange relations on employee engagement and work role performance. International Journal of Organization Theory & Behavior, 16(4), 465-493.
Chughtai, A., & Buckley, F. (2011). Work engagement: antecedents, the mediating role of learning goal orientation and job performance. Career Development International, 16(7), 684-705.
Clark, M.A., Lelchook, A.M., & Taylor, M.L. (2010). Beyond the big five: how narcissism, perfectionism and dispositional affect relate to workaholism. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 786-791.
Cook, R., & Gilin, D. (2023). Concurrent experiences of work engagement and workaholism: A factor-level profile analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 202, 112000.
Fincham, J.E. (2008). Response rates and responsiveness for surveys, standards, and the journal. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 72(2), 1-3.
Garg, S., & Dhar, R. (2017). Employee service innovative behavior: The roles of leader-member exchange (LMX), work engagement, and job autonomy. International Journal of Manpower, 38(2), 242-258.
Gorgievski, M.J., Bakker, A.B., & Schaufeli, W.B. (2010). Work engagement and workaholism: comparing the self-employed and salaried employees. Journal of Positive Psychology, 5, 83-96.
Gorgievski, M.J., Moriano, J.A., & Bakker, A.B. (2013). Relating work engagement and workaholism to entrepreneurial performance. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29(2), 106-121.
Grobelna, A. (2019). Effects of individual and job characteristics on hotel contact employees’ work engagement and their performance outcomes: a case study from Poland. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(1), 349-369.
Guan, X., & Frenkel, S. (2018). How HR practice, work engagement and job crafting influence employee performance. Chinese Management Studies, 12(3), 591-607.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010), Multivariate data analysis, 7th edition. New York: Pearson.
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2017), A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM), 2nd edition. London: Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Halbesleben, J.R.B., & Wheeler, A.R. (2008). The relative roles of engagement and embeddedness in predicting job performance and intention to leave. Work & Stress, 22, 242-256.
Hsiao, H., Chang, H.J., Tu, Y., & Chen,S. (2011). The impact of self-efficacy on innovative work behavior for teachers. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 1(1), 31-36.
Ismail, H., Iqbal, A., & Nasr, L. (2019). Employee engagement and job performance in Lebanon: the mediating role of creativity. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 68(3), 506-523.
Jahangir, M., Khorakian, A., & Lagzian, M. (2023). The impacts of work engagement on innovative behavior with an emphasis on the mediatory role of sharing mistakes. Innovation Management Journal, 5(1), 29-52.
Janssen, O. (2003). Innovative behavior and job involvement at the price of conflict and less satisfactory relations with co-workers. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76, 347-364.
Jindal, D., Boxall, P., Cheung, G.W., & Hutchison, A. (2022). How do work engagement and work autonomy affect job crafting and performance? An analysis in an Indian manufacturer. Personnel Review, https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-11-2019-0646
Juyumaya, J., & Torres, J. P. (2023). Effects of transformational leadership and work engagement on managers’ creative performance. Baltic Journal of Management, 18(1), 34-53.
Karadas, G., & Karatepe, O. (2019). Unraveling the black box: The linkage between high-performance work systems and employee outcomes. Employee Relations, 41(1), 67-83.
Kelley, D.J., Bosma, N., & Amoro´S, J.E. (2010), The global entrepreneurship monitor, 2010, Global Report, Babson College, Babson Park, MA; Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile; Ha´sko´linn Reykjavı´k University, Reykjavı´k, Iceland; and Global Entrepreneurship Research Association, London.
Kickul, J., & D'Intino, R. (2005). Measure for measure: modeling entrepreneurial self-efficacy onto instrumental tasks within the new venture creation process. New England Journal of Entrepreneurship, 8(2), 39-47.
Kim, M., & Koo, D. (2017). Linking LMX, engagement, innovative behavior, and job performance in hotel employees. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(12), 3044-3062.
Kline, R. B. (2010), Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, 3rd edition, New York: The Guilford Press.
Kumar, R., & Uzkurt, C. (2010). Investigating the effects of self-efficacy on innovativeness and the moderating impact of cultural dimensions. Journal of International Business and Cultural Studies, 4(1), 1-15.
Lazauskaite-Zabielske, J., Urbanaviciute, I., & Rekasiute Balsiene, R. (2018). From psychosocial working environment to good performance: the role of work engagement. Baltic Journal of Management, 13(2), 236-249.
Lee, Y., Lee, J. Y., & Lee, J. (2022). The relationship between work engagement and workaholism: a systematic review and meta-analysis. European Journal of Training and Development, 46(9), 996-1028.
Lı´bano, M., Llorens, S., Salanova, M., & Schaufela, W.B. (2010). Validity of a brief workaholism scale. Psicothema, 22, 143-150.
Llorens, S., Schaufeli,W.B. , Bakker, A., & Salanova, M. (2007). Does a positive gain of resources, efficacy beliefs and engagement exist?. Computers on Human Behaviour, 23, 825-841.
Lu, X., Yu, H., & Shan, B. (2022). Relationship between employee mental health and job performance: mediation role of innovative behavior and work engagement. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(11), 1-12.
Lyons, P., & Bandura, R. (2019). Self-efficacy: core of employee success. Development and Learning in Organizations, 33(3), 9-12.
MacLeod, D., & Clarke, N. (2010). Leadership and employee engagement: passing fad or a new way of doing business?. International Journal of Leadership in Public Services, 6(4), 26-30.
Miao, C., Qian, S., & Ma, D. (2017). The relationship between entrepreneurial selfefficacy and firm Performance: a meta-analysis of main and moderator effects. Journal of Small Business Management, 55(1), 87-107.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I.H. (1994), Psychometric theory, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Randhawa, G. (2004). Self-efficacy and work performance: an empirical study. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 39(3), 336-346.
Rasool, S. F., Wang, M., Zhang, Y., & Samma, M. (2020). Sustainable work performance: the roles of workplace violence and occupational stress. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(3), 1-12.
Rauch, A., & Frese, M. (2000). Psychological approaches to entrepreneurial success: A general model and an overview of findings. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 15, 101-141.
Reina-Tamayo, A., Bakker, A., & Derks, D. (2018). The work engagement–performance link: an episodic perspective. Career Development International, 23(5), 478-496.
Rubianto, L., & Kembaren, E. M. (2023). Occupational self-efficacy as a predictor of work engagement employees working telecommuting during the covid-19 pandemic. Jurnal Ilmiah Psikologi Terapan, 11(1), 13-18.
Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B., & Salanova, M. (2006b). The measurement of work engagement with a brief questionnaire: a cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 701-716.
Shane, S., Locke, E.A., & Collins, C.J. (2003). Entrepreneurial motivation. Human Resource Management Review, 13, 257-279.
Sharma, G. (2017). Pros and cons of different sampling techniques. International Journal of Applied Research, 3(7), 749-752.
Shaver, K.G., Gartner, W.B., Crosby, E., Bakalarova, K., & Gatewood, E.J. (2001). Attributions about entrepreneurship: a framework and process for analyzing reasons for starting a business. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 26(2), 28-33.
Sherer, M., Maddux, J.E., Mercandante, B., Prentice-Dunn, S., Jacobs, B., & Rogers, R.W. (1982). The self-efficacy scale: construction and validation. Psychological Reports, 51, 663-71.
Shkoler, O., & Kimura, T. (2020). How does work motivation impact employees’ investment at work and their job engagement? A moderated-moderation perspective through an international lens. Fronteirs in Pychology, 11(Article, 38), 1-16.
Slåtten, T. (2014). Determinants and effects of employee’s creative self-efficacy on innovative activities. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 6(4), 326-347.
Soomro, B. A., & Shah, N. (2020). Entrepreneurial orientation and performance in a developing country: Strategic entrepreneurship as a mediator. Business Strategy and Development, 3(4), 567-577.
Soomro, B. A., Shah, N., & Lashari, A. A. (2020). Assessment of entrepreneurial networking activities and perceived self-efficacy towards entrepreneurial success. SALU-Commerce and Economics Review, 6(1), 30-46.
Soomro, B.A., Mangi, S., & Shah, N. (2021). Strategic factors and significance of organizational innovation and organizational learning in organizational performance. European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(2), 481-506.
Soomro, B.A., Zehri, A.W., Anwar, S., Abdelwahed, N.A.A., & Shah, N. (2023). Developing the relationship between corporate cultural factors and employees' organizational commitment via self-efficacy. South Asian Journal of Business Studies, https://doi.org/10.1108/SAJBS-12-2021-0459
Spagnoli, S., Haynes, N.J., Kovalchuk, L.S., Clark, M.A., Buono, C., & Balducci, C. (2020). Workload, workaholism, and job performance: uncovering their complex relationship. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(18), 1-20.
Stajkovic, A., & F. Luthans (1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 240-261.
Stephan, U., & Richter, P.G. (2006). Erfolgreiche Unternehmen in Deutschland, Polen, Tschechien & Bulgarien, Bd.2: Personen, Strategien, Gesundheit und Erfolg in KMU (Successful Entrepreneurs in Germany, Poland, Czech Republic & Bulgaria, 2, Personality, Strategies, Health and Success in SMEs), TUD Press, Dresden.
Taris, T.W., Schaufeli, W.B., & Shimazu, A. (2009). The push and pull of work: the differences between workaholism and work engagement. In Bakker, A.B. and Leiter, M.P. (Eds), Work Engagement: A Handbook of Essential Theory and Research, Psychology Press, New York, NY, 39-53.
Tim, S.M., Bakker, A.B., & Xanthpoulou, D. (2011). Do transformational leaders enhance their followers’ daily work engagement. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(1), 121-131.
Van Beek, I., Taris, T.W., & Schaufeli, W.B. (2011). Workaholic and work engaged employees: dead ringers or worlds apart?. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16, 468-482.
van Wijhe, C. I., Peeters, M. C. W., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2011). To stop or not to stop; that’s the question: About persistence and mood of workaholics and work engaged employees. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 18, 361-372.
Vincent-Höper, S., Muser, C., & Janneck, M. (2012). Transformational leadership, work engagement, and occupational success. Career Development International, 17(7), 663-682.
Wu, T., & Wu, Y. (2019). Innovative work behaviors, employee engagement, and surface acting: A delineation of supervisor-employee emotional contagion effects. Management Decision, 57(11), 3200-3216.
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W.B. (2007). The role of personal resources in the job demand-recourses model. International Journal of Stress Management, 14(2), 121-141.
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Heuven, E., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2008). Working in the sky: a diary study on work engagement among flight attendants. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 13, 345-356.
Yulita, Y., Idris, M. A., & Dollard, M. F. (2022). Effect of psychosocial safety climate on psychological distress via job resources, work engagement and workaholism: A multilevel longitudinal study. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 28(2), 691-708.
Zaman, S., & Ansari, A. H. (2023). Pathways to job engagement: evidences from the software industry. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 53(1), 100-118.
Zheng, Z., Graham, L., Epitropaki, O., & Snape, E. (2020). Service leadership, work engagement, and service performance: the moderating role of leader skills. Group & Organization Management, 45(1), 43-74.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms: the author(s) authorize(s) the publication of the text in the journal;
2. The author(s) ensure(s) that the contribution is original and unpublished and that it is not in the process of evaluation by another journal;
3. The journal is not responsible for the views, ideas and concepts presented in articles, and these are the sole responsibility of the author(s);
4. The publishers reserve the right to make textual adjustments and adapt texts to meet with publication standards.
5. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right to first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Atribuição NãoComercial 4.0 internacional, which allows the work to be shared with recognized authorship and initial publication in this journal.
6. Authors are allowed to assume additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g. publish in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with recognition of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
7. Authors are allowed and are encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on a personal web page) at any point before or during the editorial process, as this can generate positive effects, as well as increase the impact and citations of the published work (see the effect of Free Access) at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html
• 8. Authors are able to use ORCID is a system of identification for authors. An ORCID identifier is unique to an individual and acts as a persistent digital identifier to ensure that authors (particularly those with relatively common names) can be distinguished and their work properly attributed.
