Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
RESEARCH REPORT
ENGAGEMENT
RESEARCH REPORT
Class: IP_17DKQ
Bui Nhat Mi
2
3
TABLE OF FIGURES
Table 1Descriptive analysis of gender..............................................................................20
Table 2 Descriptive analysis of age band.........................................................................21
Table 3 Descriptive analysis of education........................................................................21
Table 4 Descriptive analysis of job..................................................................................22
Table 5 Descriptive analysis of income band...................................................................23
Table 6 Stop criterion changes.........................................................................................25
Table 7 Outer loadings.....................................................................................................26
Table 8 Internal consistency.............................................................................................27
Table 9 Convergent validity.............................................................................................27
Table 10 Cross loadings...................................................................................................29
Table 11 Fornell-Larcker criterion...................................................................................30
Table 12 HTMT value......................................................................................................31
Table 13 HTMT ratio.......................................................................................................31
Table 14 Inner VIF...........................................................................................................32
Table 15 Path coefficients................................................................................................32
Table 16 R square............................................................................................................33
Table 17 f effect size........................................................................................................33
Table 18 Blindfolding......................................................................................................34
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ChapterI. Introduction....................................................................................................4
1.1 Problem statement................................................................................................4
1.2 Research objective................................................................................................4
1.3 Research questions................................................................................................5
1.4 Research method...................................................................................................5
1.5 Scope of study......................................................................................................6
1.6 Structure of study..................................................................................................6
ChapterII. Literature review............................................................................................7
2.1 Introduction..............................................................................................................7
2.2 Definition of factors..................................................................................................7
2.2.1 Definition of job fit............................................................................................7
2.2.2 Definition of life satisfaction.............................................................................8
2.2.3 Definition of job satisfaction..............................................................................8
2.2.4 Definition of intention to quit............................................................................9
2.2.5 Definition of work engagement..........................................................................9
2.3 Related theory.........................................................................................................10
2.3.1 Social Exchange Theory (SET)........................................................................10
2.3.2 Job demands-resources (JD-R).........................................................................11
2.4 Previous studies......................................................................................................12
2.4 Factors influencing work engagement and factors being influenced by work
engagement................................................................................................................... 13
2.4.1 Job fit...............................................................................................................13
2.4.2 Life satisfaction................................................................................................13
2.4.3 Job satisfaction.................................................................................................13
2.4.4 Intention to quit................................................................................................14
ChapterIII. Methodology................................................................................................15
3.1 Research type.........................................................................................................15
3.2 Research strategy....................................................................................................15
2
3.3 Quantitative approach.............................................................................................15
3.3.1 Sampling design...............................................................................................15
3.3.2 Measurement scale...........................................................................................16
3.3.3 Data collection.................................................................................................16
3.3.4 Information consumption.................................................................................17
ChapterIV. Discussion....................................................................................................20
4.1 Introduction............................................................................................................20
4.2 Descriptive analysis................................................................................................20
4.3 Using Smart PLS....................................................................................................23
4.3.1 Evaluation of the measurement model.............................................................24
4.3.2 Evaluation of the structural model...................................................................32
ChapterV. Conclusion...................................................................................................35
5.1 Main findings.........................................................................................................35
5.2 Recommendations..................................................................................................35
5.3 Limitations and further research.............................................................................38
APPENDIX: PREVIOUS STUDIES...............................................................................39
References........................................................................................................................ 47
3
ChapterI. Introduction
1.1 Problem statement
It is vital that there are many contributing factors to the success of the company. While
machines and systems are gradually operated automatically, people pay more attention to
the work engagement in the workplace. It is not that easy to administer human resources
since its practice is an art. Many research has been done to acknowledge the importance
of work engagement. Some researchers have studied factors that affect the work
engagement. For example, in 2014, CHULWOO KIM(Agrawal, 2016) concluded that
leadership has a strong impact on work engagement. Similarly, SANAZ
SOHRABIZADEH’s study has proved that rewards affect work
engagement(Sohrabizadeh & Sayfouri, 2014). On the other hand, there are also many
studies carried out to find out how work engagement links to other factors. In 2017,
YUNSOO LEE studied the effect of work engagement on work role behaviors(Y. Lee,
Youn, Jiwon, Woocheol, & Daeyeon, 2017). What is more, CHRISTINA LEE also made
a research to study the consequences of work engagement to the fairness and openness of
the structure of the organization(C. Lee, 2017). People’s concern toward this issue is
never an old topic to discuss. Although various researches have been made, there are still
something misrepresented. Scarcely researches have been made to study the interrelation
between work engagement and contributing factors. For that reason, we make this
research to study the effects of job fit, life satisfaction to job satisfaction, intention to quit
through work engagement. These factors have been studied before but separately. So not
only the study perceives the problem with another perspective but also figures out
whether there is any connection among them.
4
how job fit, life satisfaction can affect work engagement. In addition, the study also
considers another dimension by acknowledging the effect of work engagement on job
satisfaction, intention to quit. Finally, the utmost purpose of the research to give
recommendations for authorities and business people to come up with effective methods
to have a better management of work engagement.
- How does job fit and life satisfaction affect work engagement?
- To what extent does work engagement affect job satisfaction, intention to quit?
Step 1: By referring to previous studies and literature review, researchers tries to figures
out factors that have effect on work engagement and vice versa. The researchers then take
into account and choose potential factors to analyze in the research. With the list of
factors, the researchers build hypothesis and collect data for hypothesis testing.
Step 2: Determine measurement scale for this research with appropriate sample case. The
researchers also develop appropriate methods to collect data
Step 3: Develop the questionnaire including personal information and factor analysis.
Every single question must meet the suitable measurement scale.
Step 4: The researchers conduct surveys online due to time-saving and convenience.
Step 5: Using SPSS and Smart PLS to analyze the data collected to tackle the research
questions successfully
5
1.5 Scope of study
The research mainly focuses on the work engagement in HCM City due to time limitation
and convenience as it is where we are studying.
-Chapter 1: Introduction mainly indicates what encourages researchers to study this topic.
Whether there is a special encouragement to talk the researcher into studying the work
engagement. In addition, research procedures, research objectives, … are also mentioned
-Chapter 3: Methodology mainly describes how the researchers collect data in detail
-Chapter 4: Using SPSS and SMART PLS to discuss and analyze the problem with
specific values.
-Chap 5: Conclusion points out main perspective in the research. In addition, the
researchers also suggest some recommendations.
6
ChapterII. Literature review
2.1 Introduction
In this chapter, we reveal definition of job fit, life satisfaction, life satisfaction, intention
to quit, work engagement and review of previous Research (both theory ad empirical
studies).
Literature review is not only a summary that simply lists keys resources meaning but also
in form of an organization system, which includes both the summary and synthesis.
Synthesis is the re-organization the important information that we have define in the
summary in a way that we will investigate to solve the research problem. This is a critical
part of any research because it reviews critically on the basement that we have collected
from previous researches related to our topics, then presents our own contribution on the
factors that the priors hadn’t investigated deeply into.
There are numerous key factors that could affect this “bond”. Personality trait, first and
foremost, that would have a major effect on the feeling of happiness or content that an
individual has on a particular position. Job candidates who don’t have an assertive manner
7
aren’t likely to be in a managerial position, while extroverted individuals would dissatisfy
working, feeling bored when be assigned in a role that involves mainly documents,
contracts. (June, 2015)
8
The term job satisfaction refers to the attitudes and feelings people have about their
work. Positive and favorable attitudes towards the job indicate job satisfaction. Negative
and unfavorable attitudes towards the job indicate job dissatisfaction.(Aziri, 2011)
Through many articles, speeches, researches that we’ve found, they are all have the
same core meanings. Job satisfaction is the feeling of contentment forward to his or her
work. Formally defined, job satisfaction is an effective or emotional response towards
various facets of one’s job or “the extent to which people like (satisfaction) or dislike
(dissatisfaction) to their job”. This could be the job in general or their attitude towards
some facets of the work, such as: Salaries and benefits, relationship with colleagues,
recognition and promotion, management and supervision
As turnover is very costly and harmful to the organization, they should figure out the
underlying reasons, especially the root causes. Because not just the people thought but
these reasons can come from the company itself: poor compensation, unhealthy
environment, ... even high salary or comfortable working condition cannot guarantee the
worker to stay with the job. or course there are lots of other factors that have impact on
one’s intention to end up the contract.
9
Work engagement is a positive, fulfilling, affective motivational state of work-
related well-being that can be seen as antidote of job burnout. Engaged employees have
high energy, and are enthusiastically involved in their work.(Warr & Inceoglu, 2012)
There are two schools of thought with regard to the definition of work engagement.
On the one hand Maslach and Leiter assume that a continuum exists with burnout and
engagement as two opposite poles. The second school of thought operationalizes
engagement in its own right as the positive antithesis of burnout. According to this
approach, work engagement is defined as a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind
that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption. Vigor is characterized by high
levels of energy and mental resilience while working, the willingness to invest effort in
one's work, and persistence even in the face of difficulties; dedication by being strongly
involved in one's work, and experiencing a sense of significance, enthusiasm, inspiration,
pride, and challenge; and absorption by being fully concentrated and happily engrossed in
one's work, whereby time passes quickly and one has difficulties with detaching oneself
from work.
11
job resources to attain and/ or optimize their personal (work) goals. The JD-R model
explains how employees’ working conditions influence their health and commitment to
the organization through two independent processes. This model assumes that job
resources and job demands evoke two different but related processes, namely a
motivational process in which job resources stimulate employees’ motivation to foster
engagement and organizational commitment and, secondly, a health impairment process
in which high job demands deplete employees’ mental and physical resources leading to
job burnout and health problems.(Schaufeli, 2017)
After taking into account all these factors, we have come up with a suggested research
model:
Job fit
+ + Job satisfaction
Work engagement
+ -
12
2.4 Factors influencing work engagement and factors
being influenced by work engagement
2.4.1 Job fit
Job fit is a very crucial factor in considering the work engagement. By definition, job fit
refers to the conformability level of an employee for a job. Thus, a more well-suited
employee will not only satisfy employees but it will also make the company more
productive and profitable. Sulistiowati Sulistiowati has found out that there can be a
positive relationship between job fit and life satisfaction.(Sulistiowati et al., 2018)
H1: There is positive relationship between job fit and work engagement.
H2: There is positive relationship between life satisfaction and work engagement.
H3: There is positive relationship between work engagement and job satisfaction.
13
2.4.4 Intention to quit
Intention to quit refers to the possibility of leaving the job. If there is a strong connection
among employees and the work, the intention of leaving the job is very low. But if they
are not engaged with their work, the tendency of quitting the job is very high. Thus, they
are connected in the reverse direction. Asi Vasudeva REDDY has proved that there exists
a negative relationship between work engagement and intention to quit.(Profile, 2018)
H4: There is negative relationship between work engagement and intention to quit.
14
ChapterIII. Methodology
3.1 Research type
The research is an exploratory study that research on a specific sample size and
consequences are figured out base on the analysis of the answer result of the sample.
16
As for the online data collection, the researcher begins to create an online questionnaire
by Google Docs. The researcher firstly sends the questionnaire to friends and tells them to
forward the questionnaire to some qualified friends or relatives. By doing so, the
researcher can ensure the quality of responses of them and their relatives and friends.
* Job fit
After a preliminary test to ensure the transparency of the group of question and show that
it is easy for respondents to understand and answer. The job fit scale included four items
which is abbreviated as JOF1, JOF2,JOF3,JOF4 shown in the table below:
* Life satisfaction
After a preliminary test to ensure the transparency of the group of question and show that
it is easy for respondents to understand and answer. The life satisfaction scale included
four items which is abbreviated as LIS1, LIS2, LIS3, LIS4 shown in the table below:
17
LIS1 I am satisfied with my life in many ways
*Work engagement
After a preliminary test to ensure the transparency of the group of question and show that
it is easy for respondents to understand and answer. The work engagement scale included
nine items which is abbreviated as WEN1, WEN2, WEN3, WEN4, WEN5, WEN6,
WEN7, WEN8, WEN9 shown in the table below:
* Job satisfaction
After a preliminary test to ensure the transparency of the group of question and show that
it is easy for respondents to understand and answer. The job satisfaction scale included six
items which is abbreviated as JOS1, JOS2, JOS3, JOS4, JOS5, JOS6 shown in the table
below:
* Intention to quit
After a preliminary test to ensure the transparency of the group of question and show that
it is easy for respondents to understand and answer. The intention to quit scale included
three items which is abbreviated as INQ1, INQ2, INQ3 shown in the table below:
19
ChapterIV. Discussion
4.1 Introduction
After forming the questionnaire with two independent items and three dependent items in
chapter 3, I use the software SPSS version 20 and Smart PLS version 3 to analyze the
research model. Firstly, the software SPSS is used to describe general information of
respondents in the survey. Then, the software Smart PLS is used to analyze the result of
the survey.
GENDER
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid "Female" 186 74.1 74.1 74.1
"Male" 65 25.9 25.9 100.0
Total 251 100.0 100.0
Table 1Descriptive analysis of gender
According to the table above, the data is collected from participants which are categorized
by gender- male and female. There are 251 samples investigated joined by the majority of
female. The proportion of female participated is 74.1 % (with 186 people) while it is 25.9
% (with 65 people) of that of male.
AGE BAND
It can be seen from the table that the vast participants of the research mainly fall upon
“under 25” which is known to be the new labor force of the economy (80.9%). The age
band “from 25 to 34” takes up 15.9%, which is ranked the second place. Finally, the range
“from 35 to 44” and “from 45 to 54” accounts for 2.4% and 0.8 % respectively.
EDUCATION
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid "High school" 17 6.8 6.8 6.8
"University" 204 81.3 81.3 88.0
“Post 19 7.6 7.6 95.6
graduate"
"Other" 11 4.4 4.4 100.0
Total 251 100.0 100.0
Table 3 Descriptive analysis of education
The table illustrates the education level of the respondents. The majority of the
participants which is classified as “university” takes up 81.3 %. The “post graduate” level
is ranked the second place with 7.6 %. Finally, the participants who respond “high
school” and “other” account for 6.8% and 4.4 % respectively.
JOB
21
Percent Percent
Valid "Office 68 27.1 27.1 27.1
worker"
"Technical 4 1.6 1.6 28.7
worker"
"Sale people" 48 19.1 19.1 47.8
"Manager" 7 2.8 2.8 50.6
"Governmental 6 2.4 2.4 53.0
officer"
"Other" 118 47.0 47.0 100.0
Total 251 100.0 100.0
Table 4 Descriptive analysis of job
It is obvious that there is a wide variety of job of the people taking part in the research.
Most of the people responds “other” (47%). There is 27.1 % and 19.1 % of people that
responds “office worker” and “sale person” respectively. In addition, there is only a minor
that is classified as “manager” (2.8%), “governmental officer” (2.4%), “technical worker”
(1.6%).
INCOME BAND
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid "Less 7 mil 159 63.3 63.3 63.3
VND"
"From 7 to 70 27.9 27.9 91.2
under 15 mil
22
VND"
"From 15 to 12 4.8 4.8 96.0
under 25 mil
VND"
"25 mil VND 10 4.0 4.0 100.0
and over"
Total 251 100.0 100.0
Table 5 Descriptive analysis of income band
Of all the 251 sample asked, the income level that is less than 7 million VND takes up the
most with 63.3%. The income level ranged 7 million VND to 15million VND is ranked
the second place with 27.9 %. Finally, the range “15million VND to 25 million VND”
and “25 million VND and over” makes up 4.8 % and 4.0 % respectively.
Stage 1: Evaluation of the measurement models. In this stage, I check the internal
consistency, convergent validity and discriminant validity.
Stage 2: Evaluation of the structural model. In this stage, I will assess structural model for
collinearity issues, the significance and relevance of the structural model relationships, the
level of R, the f effect size, the predictive relevance Q, the q effect size.
23
IT IT IT W W W W W W W W W
JO JO JO JO JO JO JO JO JO LI LI LI LI JO
Q Q Q EN EN EN EN EN EN EN EN EN
F2 F3 F4 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S1 S2 S3 S4 F1
1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Itera
0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3
tion
39 39 39 32 32 32 23 23 23 23 23 23 35 35 35 35 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 2
0
Itera
0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2
tion
52 41 23 30 39 31 28 28 14 19 25 21 36 35 46 20 6 3 4 7 2 3 8 4 6 9
1
Itera
0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2
tion
52 41 23 30 39 31 28 29 14 19 25 21 36 35 46 20 6 2 4 7 2 3 8 3 5 9
2
Itera
0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2
tion
52 41 23 30 39 31 28 29 14 19 25 21 36 35 46 20 6 2 4 7 2 3 8 3 5 9
3
Itera
0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2
tion
52 41 23 30 39 31 28 29 14 19 25 21 36 35 46 20 6 2 4 7 2 3 8 3 5 9
4
Itera
0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2
tion
52 41 23 30 39 31 28 29 14 19 25 21 36 35 46 20 6 2 4 7 2 3 8 3 5 9
5
Itera
0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2
tion
52 41 23 30 39 31 28 29 14 19 25 21 36 35 46 20 6 2 4 7 2 3 8 3 5 9
6
Itera
0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2
tion
52 41 23 30 39 31 28 29 14 19 25 21 36 35 46 20 6 2 4 7 2 3 8 3 5 9
7
Table 6 Stop criterion changes
The number of iteration is 5, and it is lower than the maximum number of iterations that I defined in the PLS-SEM
algorithm parameter settings. Therefore, we conclude that the PLS path model estimation converges.
24
* Indicator reliability
Intention to quit Job fit Job satisfaction Life satisfaction Work engagement
ITQ1 0.891
ITQ2 0.865
ITQ3 0.73
JOF1 0.705
JOF2 0.767
JOF3 0.865
JOF4 0.695
JOS1 0.703
JOS2 0.783
JOS3 0.617
JOS4 0.636
JOS5 0.809
JOS6 0.714
LIS1 0.674
LIS2 0.762
LIS3 0.792
LIS4 0.591
WEN1 0.764
WEN2 0.657
WEN3 0.759
WEN4 0.765
WEN5 0.644
WEN6 0.747
WEN7 0.75
WEN8 0.733
WEN9 0.813
Table 7 Outer loadings
All outer loadings of the reflective constructs Intention to quit, Job fit, Job satisfaction, Life satisfaction, Work engagement
are well above the threshold value of 0.7, which suggests sufficient levels of indicator reliability.
25
* Internal consistency
With the value of Cronbach’s alpha and Composite Reliability is greater than 0.7 and smaller than 0.95, the internal
consistency of the research model is satisfied.
*Convergent validity
The AVE values of Intention to quit, Job fit, Job satisfaction, Life satisfaction, Work engagement are well above the
required minimum level of 0.50. Thus, the measures of these reflective constructs have high levels of convergent validity.
* Discriminant validity
26
In order to check the discriminant validity of the research model, we use either of the cross-loadings, Fornell-Larcker
criterion or Heterotrait-Monotrait ratio (HTMT) and HTMT value (Phillips, 2013), (Henseler, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2015)
Cross loadings
Intention to quit Job fit Job satisfaction Life satisfaction Work engagement
ITQ1 0.891 -0.175 -0.259 -0.121 -0.426
ITQ2 0.865 -0.21 -0.209 -0.154 -0.342
27
ITQ3 0.73 -0.102 -0.146 -0.164 -0.192
JOF1 -0.079 0.705 0.39 0.264 0.363
JOF2 -0.181 0.767 0.451 0.223 0.381
JOF3 -0.22 0.865 0.428 0.252 0.492
JOF4 -0.122 0.695 0.336 0.399 0.392
JOS1 -0.158 0.41 0.703 0.348 0.497
JOS2 -0.254 0.45 0.783 0.311 0.502
JOS3 -0.096 0.292 0.617 0.225 0.254
JOS4 -0.178 0.26 0.636 0.267 0.336
JOS5 -0.202 0.475 0.809 0.375 0.438
JOS6 -0.181 0.3 0.714 0.295 0.365
LIS1 -0.141 0.403 0.415 0.674 0.355
LIS2 -0.146 0.18 0.256 0.762 0.342
LIS3 -0.135 0.272 0.297 0.792 0.451
LIS4 -0.005 0.164 0.265 0.591 0.199
WEN1 -0.289 0.433 0.492 0.375 0.764
WEN2 -0.172 0.338 0.342 0.451 0.657
WEN3 -0.307 0.413 0.41 0.297 0.759
WEN4 -0.424 0.442 0.456 0.393 0.765
WEN5 -0.366 0.29 0.26 0.321 0.644
WEN6 -0.257 0.34 0.408 0.315 0.747
WEN7 -0.374 0.469 0.562 0.381 0.75
WEN8 -0.249 0.38 0.39 0.355 0.733
WEN9 -0.263 0.435 0.455 0.423 0.813
28
From the table of Cross loadings, we can see that the indicator ITQ1 has the highest value
for the loadings with its corresponding constructs Intention to quit (0.94), while all cross-
loadings with other constructs are considerably lower (such as on Job fit (-0.175), Job
satisfaction (-0.259), Life satisfaction (-0.121), Work engagement (-0.426)). In general,
the cross loadings values are acceptable.
Fornell-Larcker criterion
Work
Intention to Job
Job fit Life satisfaction engagemen
quit satisfaction
t
Intention to
0.832
quit
Job fit -0.203 0.761
Job
-0.257 0.526 0.714
satisfaction
Life
-0.166 0.37 0.433 0.709
satisfaction
Work
engagemen -0.411 0.54 0.579 0.499 0.739
t
Table 11 Fornell-Larcker criterion
According to the Fornell-Larcker criterion, the square root of the AVE of each construct
should be higher than the construct’s highest correlation with any construct in the model.
The reflective construct Intention to quit has a value of 0.832 for the square root of its
AVE, which is greater than other correlation values in the columns of Intention to quit.
However, for Job fit, we need to consider the correlations in both the row and column.
Overall, the square roots of the AVEs for the reflective constructs Job fit (0.761), Job
satisfaction (0.714), Life satisfaction (0.709), Work engagement (0.739) are all higher
than the correlations of these constructs with other latent variables in the path model, thus
indicating all constructs are valid measures of unique concepts.
29
Original Sample
97.50
Sample Mean Bias 2.50%
%
(O) (M)
Job fit -> Intention to quit 0.245 0.259 0.014 0.111 0.404
Job satisfaction -> Intention to
0.295 0.306 0.011 0.161 0.452
quit
Job satisfaction -> Job fit 0.657 0.656 -0.001 0.472 0.803
Life satisfaction -> Intention to
0.239 0.256 0.017 0.103 0.386
quit
Life satisfaction -> Job fit 0.508 0.521 0.014 0.357 0.627
Life satisfaction -> Job
0.578 0.58 0.002 0.443 0.7
satisfaction
Work engagement -> Intention to
0.449 0.451 0.002 0.306 0.582
quit
Work engagement -> Job fit 0.644 0.645 0.001 0.51 0.759
Work engagement -> Job
0.644 0.644 -0.001 0.527 0.737
satisfaction
Work engagement -> Life
0.612 0.62 0.008 0.467 0.728
satisfaction
Table 12 HTMT value
An HTMT value must be different from 1. As in the table, all HTMT value are different
from 1.
HTMT ratio
Intentio Job Life
n to satisfactio satisfactio Work
quit Job fit n n engagement
Intention to
quit
Job fit 0.245
Job satisfaction 0.295 0.657
Life
satisfaction 0.239 0.508 0.578
Work
engagement 0.449 0.644 0.644 0.612
Table 13 HTMT ratio
An HTMT ratio must be smaller than 0.85. As in the table, all HTMT ratio are smaller
than 0.85 so we can conclude discriminant validity
30
4.3.2 Evaluation of the structural model
* Collinearity (inner VIF)
All inner VIF value are below 5. Therefore, collinearity among the predictor constructs is
not a critical issue in the structural model, and we can continue examining the results
report.
31
With p<0.05, all four hypotheses are supported.
Table 16 R square
There are three dependent variables so R square has 3 variables. There are many factors
affecting the intention to quit, but only work engagement is selected. It accounts for
16.9%
Following the rules of thumb, the R values of 3 constructs can be considered moderate.
(R square > 0.5 and < 0.75)
Only life satisfaction has small effect on work engagement (0.171<0.200). Work
engagement has medium effect on intention to quit (0.15<0.204<0.35) and job fit has
medium effect on work engagement (0.15<0.171<0.35). Work engagement has large
effect size on job satisfaction (0.505>0.35)
Work engagement quite affect the intention to quit which might be taken into
consideration in the researches in the future.
32
* Blindfolding (construct cross-validated redundancy)
As can be seen, the Q value of all three endogenous constructs are considerably above
zero. These results provide clear support for the model’s predictive relevance the
endogenous latent variables.
33
ChapterV. Conclusion
5.1 Main findings
In conclusion, it is very important to explain how the analysis answers the research
questions. After doing the research, it can be seen that there are two things that can be
withdrawn. Firstly, from chapter 3, we have presumed that job fit, life satisfaction and job
satisfaction have positive relation to work engagement whereas work engagement bears
negative relationship to intention to quit. Therefore, the results we got by using Smart
PLS helps the researcher to confirmed the aforementioned hypotheses are right. These
findings might such not be an extraordinary masterpiece but to some extent, the
researcher has made some contributions for later researches. Secondly, the questions used
for the survey are translated quite accurately from Vietnamese to English, so the later
researchers (if concerns) can infer these questions for references.
5.2 Recommendations
- It is highly recommended for practitioners to take a look at the below table for some
references. The table shows that of the two factors (job fit, life satisfaction), job fit bears
a stronger relation to work engagement. For that reason, the company can base on this
platform to come up with and implement relevant policies and strategies to increase job
fit which in turns lead to higher work engagement
34
Sample Mean Deviation O/STDEV|)
(O) (M) (STDEV)
Job fit -> Work 0.412 0.415 0.06 6.856 0
engagement
Life satisfaction 0.346 0.351 0.064 5.377 0
-> Work
engagement
Work engagement -0.411 -0.417 0.057 7.26 0
-> Intention to
quit
Work engagement 0.579 0.586 0.046 12.651 0
-> Job satisfaction
- It is vital that work engagement is of great importance in the workplace. A high level of
work engagement tends to increase job satisfaction and decrease intention to quit.
However, to increase work engagement, there are two factors needed to be taken into
account: job fit, life satisfaction. As we can see from the below table, JOF 3 (The job fits
me) and LIS3(I have gained important achievements in life recently) have greater impact
on work engagement in comparison to others. From the manager point of view, the
company should give their employees the best conditions and give them a helping hand in
every aspect so that not only can they succeed in their life but they can also perform
higher work engagement.
35
ITQ3 0.236
JOF1 0.291
JOF2 0.306
JOF3 0.395
JOF4 0.314
JOS1 0.288
JOS2 0.29
JOS3 0.147
JOS4 0.194
JOS5 0.253
JOS6 0.211
LIS1 0.364
LIS2 0.351
LIS3 0.463
LIS4 0.204
WEN
0.163
1
WEN
0.129
2
WEN
0.145
3
WEN
0.173
4
WEN
0.121
5
WEN
0.135
6
WEN
0.184
7
WEN
0.139
8
WEN
0.159
9
5.3 Limitations and further research
There are some limitations of the research that can be tackled by doing further researches.
Firstly, the research just investigates two factors affecting the work engagement.
36
However, there are manifold factors that can have impact on work engagement.
Similarly, besides job satisfaction and intention to quit, work engagement can influence
more factors. Further research can be made to state the problem from different
perspective and thus helps to complete the research at a higher level. Secondly, the
research views the problem as a whole, which means it just give a general research of
multi-job. This can be acceptable in theory but in practical, because of the characteristics
of each job, they face different problems, so there should be researches investigating the
work engagement in specific field to give a clear, accurate and better understanding.
Finally, due to the pressure of time and limited finance capacity, the research is made
through acquaintances of the researchers in Ho Chi Minh city only and cannot be
investigated at a larger scale.
37
APPENDIX: PREVIOUS STUDIES
PUBLISH
AUTHORS NAME PREFIX SUFFIX RESULTS
ED YEAR
38
AN INTERGATIVE Job resource Work Work role
LITERATURE REVIEW ON ( learning Engagement behaviors
EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT opportunity, Turnover intention
IN THE FIELD OF HUMAN coworkers Organizational
RESOURCE support , and knowledge creation
DEVELOPMENT: supervisor, Outcome variables
EXPLORING WHERE WE support) Organizational
ARE AND WHERE WE Perceived citizenship
SHOULD GO support for behavior
participation in Discretionary effort
YUNSOO LEE hrd practices Perceptions of hdr
2017
Training practices
perception
Servant
leadership
Transformational
leadership
Supervisor/cowor
ker incivility
Meaningful work
Social interaction
Goal congruence
ANTECEDENTS AND Reward and Job Rewards affect the
CONSEQUENCES OF recognition satisfaction model in two
WORK ENGAGEMENT Organizational- Organizatio dimensions: firstly,
SANAZ AMONG NURSES supervisory nal on work
2014 SOHRABIZADE support citizenship engagement as one
H Job behaviour of the antecedents,
characteristics Intention to and secondly, on
quit nursing job
satisfaction
39
FACTORS AFFECTING Workload, shift Turnover Bureaucracy and
TURNOVER AND patterns, career and lack of autonomy,
RETENTION OF HOSPITAL development and retention workload/working
CONSULTANTS AND training, payment hours/working
MIDWIVES and benefits, pattern, lack of
AUTHORS working recognition of
JIE SHEN (DR) environment contribution and
job-related distress
are the main factors
influencing
midwives and
consultants
turnover
SCIENCE TEACHERS : The nature of job Turnover, Fringe Benefits has
FACTORS THAT AFFECT attrition low positive
JOB SATISFACTION Payment relationship with
Supervision the teachers'
Contingent attrition while the
Reward others have high
Operating
TANIA T Conditions
ARMER Coworker,
communication
Fringe Benefits
Promotion
Experiences, age,
gender, level of
education,
burnout,...
A STUDY OF THE Working Performanc Adequate
2016 PEIDI ZHANG FACTORS THAT AFFECT pressure and e of the compensations
40
EMPLOYEE hotel atmosphere employees Financial rewards
PERFORMANCE IN THE Higher career The reputation of
UK HOTELS prospect hotels
Monthly, Work pressure in
annually rewards peak season makes
for performance negatively
performance
FACTORS INFLUENCING Leader Employee Participated
PUBLIC EMPLOYEE behaviours engagement leadership support
ENGAGEMENT Participated Supportiveness of
leadership organizational
support context
2014 CHULWOO KIM Supportiveness
of organizational
context
Procedural and
distributive
fairness
41
Job satisfaction Employee No significant
engagement impact of job
satisfaction on
A STUDY OF employee
SHWETA RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN engagement
2015
MALHOTRA JOB SATISFACTION AND
EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT
42
WEEKLY WORK Weekly Work Enhance
ENGAGEMENT AND variations in job engagement employees' feelings
PERFORMANCE:A STUDY resources of work
AMONG STARTING engagement
BAKKER TEACHERS
2010
2018 SUSAN CREATE A WORK Work Work The glue that holds
M.HEATHFIELD ENVIRONMENT THAT engagement environmen the stragetic
43
ENCOURAGES EMPLOYEE t obtectives of the
ENGAGEMENT emoloyee and the
business together is
frequent, effective
communication that
reaches and
informs the
employee at the
level and practice
of his or her job.
HOW IMPORTANT IS JOB Work Job Keeping employees
SATISFACTION IN engagement Satisfaction engaged and
TODAY’S WORKPLACE? satisfied takes more
BISK than just good pay
and benefits
44
CONCEPT AND A NEW Physical & Work Intention, behaviors, but also
IINVENTORY engagement Utrecht relates to human
work cognitions and
ROBERT J. engagement emotions The
TAORMINA Scale, Self- new work
Efficacy engagement
inventory can be
applied to the
business setting.
45
References
Agrawal, S. (2016). FACTORS INFLUENCING EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT : A
STUDY OF DIVERSE F ACTORS I NFLUENCING E MPLOYEE E
NGAGEMENT :, (June).
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014).
PLS-SEM : Indeed a Silver Bullet PLS-SEM : Indeed a Silver Bullet, (January
2015), 37–41. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing
discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling, 115–135.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
June, S. (2015). The Relationship between Person-job Fit and Job Performance : A Study
among the Employees of the Service Sector SMEs in Malaysia The Relationship
between Person-job Fit and Job Performance : A Study among the Employees of the
Service Sector SMEs in Malaysia, (November).
Lee, Y., Youn, H., Jiwon, S., Woocheol, P., & Daeyeon, K. (2017). An integrative
literature review on employee engagement in the field of human resource
development : exploring where we are and where we should go. Asia Pacific
46
Education Review, (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-017-9508-3
Shiau, W., & Meiling, M. (2012). Computers in Human Behavior Factors affecting online
group buying intention and satisfaction : A social exchange theory perspective.
Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6), 2431–2444.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.030
Sulistiowati, S., Komari, N., & Dhamayanti, E. (2018). The Effects of Person-Job Fit on
Employee Engagement Among Lecturers in Higher Education Institutions : Is There
a Difference Between Lecturers in Public and Private Higher Education
Institutions ?, 8(3), 75–80.
Warr, P., & Inceoglu, I. (2012). Job Engagement , Job Satisfaction , and Contrasting
47
Associations with Person- Job Fit, 1–22.
48