No abstract

The aim of the paper is to present the findings of our own questionnaire-based quantitative study carried out in 2018. The research questionnaire was sent to companies in the databases of two universities (the database of enterprises cooperating with each university), which were selected according to the criterion of the number of employees (micro, small, medium, and large companies). The study attempted to identify the correlations among the following variables: people-oriented management, non-people-oriented management, direct active and passive participation, and engagement in work. Two research questions drove the research process: (RQ1) What are the links between people-oriented management and non-people-oriented management, direct (active and passive) participation, and work engagement? (RQ2) Does direct participation (active and passive) mediate the relationship between people and non-people-oriented management and employees’ engagement? To this end, 1037 employees of companies operating in Poland reported the intensity of people-oriented management, non-people-oriented management, and direct (active and passive) participation. Research findings revealed that people-oriented management and active participation (i.e., co-deciding) are the most significant for work engagement. Not only does non-people-oriented management entail a low level of engagement but a lower level of direct participation as well. As far as the dimensions of engagement are concerned (i.e., vigour, dedication, and absorption), if one of them is more intense, the other are intense as well. People-oriented management translates into active participation and the latter into engagement in all the three dimensions. A structural equation model demonstrated that perceived people-oriented management and active participation were strong, positive, and significant predictors of work engagement.

No abstract

Sustainable human resource management (SHRM) views employees as a very important resource for the organisation, while paying close attention to their preferences, needs, and perspectives. The individual is an essential element of SHRM. The article focuses on analyzing selected SHRM issues related to the individual employee's level of job engagement and employee satisfaction. The main objective of our study was to identify individual-level correlations between factors affecting employee satisfaction, such as: workplace well-being, employee development, employee retention, job engagement, and employee satisfaction. Based on the results of a systematic literature review, we posed the following research question: is there any relation between factors affecting employee satisfaction (employee workplace well-being, employee development, employee retention, work engagement) and employee satisfaction in the SHRM context? To answer the research question, we have conducted a quantitative study on the sample of 1051 employees in companies in Poland and posed five hypotheses (H1-H5). The research findings illustrate that higher level of employee workplace well-being (H1), employee development, (H2), employee retention (H3) was related to higher level of employee engagement (H4), which in turn led to higher level of employee satisfaction. The results show the mediating role of employee engagement in the relationship between workplace well-being, employee development, employee retention, and employee satisfaction (H5). The presented results contribute to the development of research on work engagement and job satisfaction in the practice of SHRM. By examining the impact of individual-level factors on job satisfaction, we explain which workplace factors should be addressed to increase an employee satisfaction and work engagement. The set of practical implications for managers implementing SHRM in the organization is discussed at the end of the paper.

Celem publikacji jest prezentacja wyników badania dotyczącego identyfikacji zależności pomiędzy zaangażowaniem w pracę, relacjami pracowników z przełożonym a rodzajem stosowanego mentoringu w organizacji i celami jego stosowania. Na podstawie uzyskanych wyników badania można stwierdzić, że mentoring skupiony na celu rozwoju zawodowego i osobistego ma większy wpływ na zaangażowanie w pracę niż mentoring skupiony na wprowadzeniu do pracy (tzw. stanowiskowy). Ponadto badania wskazują, że niezależnie od stopnia sformalizowania mentoringu (proces sformalizowany bądź niesformalizowany) oraz celu prowadzonego mentoringu kontakt z przełożonym był łatwy, a pracownicy mieli możliwość zwracania się z prośbą o pomoc do przełożonych z taką samą częstotliwością. Stwierdzono również, że największa grupa pracowników mająca możliwość korzystania z wiedzy i doświadczenia innych pracowników w organizacji to uczestnicy mentoringu rozwojowego oraz mentoringu stanowiskowego.