Effect of Organizational Support in Terms of Training, Autonomy, and Technology on Work Engagement at Private Universities in Bangkok, Thailand
Main Article Content
Abstract
With rapid changes in technology, working styles in universities have also changed from traditional face-to-face to online and hybrid teaching. This study focused on the work engagement of faculty and staff at three private universities in Bangkok. The focus of the investigation was on how organizational support, in terms of training, autonomy, and technology, influenced the work engagement of faculty and staff in adopting new working styles. A self-administered questionnaire was used in the study. Valid questionnaire responses (N = 329) received were subjected to ordinal linear regression analysis. The results obtained indicated that organizational support in terms of training, autonomy, and technology was positively associated with work engagement (p = .009, .009, and .000 respectively). It is suggested that the universities need to provide sufficient training, autonomy, and technological know-how to their faculty and staff to help them transition to new ways of working smoothly. Finally, some managerial implications arising from the study are provided.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright: Asia-Pacific International University reserve exclusive rights to publish, reproduce and distribute the manuscript and all contents therein.
References
Amor, A. M., Vázquez, J. P. A., & Faíña, J. A. (2020). Transformational leadership and work engagement: Exploring the mediating role of structural empowerment. European Management Journal, 38(1), 169–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2019.06.007
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2008). Towards a model of work engagement. Career Development International, 13(3), 209–223. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620430810870476
Bakker, A. B., & van Wingerden, J. (2021). Do personal resources and strengths use increase work engagement? The effects of a training intervention. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 26(1), 20–30. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000266
Bayona, J. A., Caballer, A., & Peiró, J. M. (2020). The relationship between knowledge characteristics’ fit and job satisfaction and job performance: The mediating role of work engagement. Sustainability, 12(6), 2336. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062336
Biggs, A., Brough, P., & Barbour, J. P. (2014). Strategic alignment with organizational priorities and work engagement: A multi‐wave analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(3), 301–317. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1866
Brown, K. A., & Mitchell, T. R. (1991). A comparison of just-in-time and batch manufacturing: the role of performance obstacles. Academy of Management Journal, 34(4), 906–917. https://doi.org/10.2307/256395
D’Agostino, R. B. (2017). Tests for the normal distribution. In R. B. D'Agostino & M. A. Stephens (Eds.), Goodness-of-fit techniques (pp. 367–420). Marcel Dekker.
Eberl, M. (2010). An application of PLS in multi-group analysis: The need for differentiated corporate-level marketing in the mobile communications industry. Academic Seensight, 33(1), 487–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32827-8_22
Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 500–508. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.500
FreeApply. (2023). World's largest universtiy catalog. https://free-apply.com/en/search/th
Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self‐determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational bBehavior, 26(4), 331–362. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.322
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., & Thiele, K. O. (2017). Mirror, mirror on the wall: A comparative evaluation of composite-based structural equation modeling methods. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(5), 616–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-017-0517-x
Hair, J. F., Money, A. H., Samouel, P., & Page, M. (2007). Research methods for business. Education+ Training, 49(4), 336–337. https://doi.org/10.1108/et.2007.49.4.336.2
Hameed, Z., Khan, I. U., Sheikh, Z., Islam, T., Rasheed, M. I., & Naeem, R. M. (2019). Organizational justice and knowledge sharing behavior: The role of psychological ownership and perceived organizational support. Personnel Review, 48(3), 748–773. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-07-2017-0217
Jaeyoung, L., Rocco, T. S., & Shuck, B. (2020). What is a resource: Toward a taxonomy of resources for employee engagement. Human Resource Development Review, 19(1), 5–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484319853100
Joe, H., Page, M., & Brunsveld, N. (2019). Essentials of business research methods. Routledge.
Malinowska, D., Tokarz, A., & Wardzichowska, A. (2018). Job autonomy in relation to work engagement and workaholism: Mediation of autonomous and controlled work motivation. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health, 31(4), 445–458. https://doi:10.13075/ijomeh.1896.01197
Mazzetti, G., Robledo, E., Vignoli, M., Topa, G., Guglielmi, D., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2023). Work engagement: A meta-analysis using the job demands-resources model. Psychological Reports, 126(3), 1069–1107. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941211051988
Molino, M., Cortese, C. G., & Ghislieri, C. (2020). The promotion of technology acceptance and work engagement in industry 4.0: From personal resources to information and training. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(7), 2438. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17072438
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Self‐regulation and the problem of human autonomy: Does psychology need choice, self‐determination, and will? Journal of Personality, 74(6), 1557–1586. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00420.x
Salanova, M., Llorens, S., Cifre, E., Martínez, I. M., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2003). Perceived collective efficacy, subjective well-being and task performance among electronic work groups: An experimental study. Small Group Research, 34(1), 43–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496402239577
Sekhar, C., Patwardhan, M., & Vyas, V. (2018). Linking work engagement to job performance through flexible human resource management. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 20(1), 72–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422317743250
Slattery, E. L., Voelker, C. C., Nussenbaum, B., Rich, J. T., Paniello, R. C., & Neely, J. G. (2011). A practical guide to surveys and questionnaires. Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 144(6), 831–837. https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599811399724
To, W. M., & Huang, G. (2022). Effects of equity, perceived organizational support and job satisfaction on organizational commitment in Macao's gaming industry. Management Decision, 60(9), 2433–2454. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-11-2021-1447
Universities-in-the-World. (2023). International universities guide. https://www.universitiesintheworld.com/private-universities-in-thailand/s-universities-in-bangkok/
Van Dorssen-Boog, P., De Jong, J., Veld, M., & Van Vuuren, T. (2020). Self-leadership among healthcare workers: A mediator for the effects of job autonomy on work engagement and health. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 14–27. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01420
Yang, L., Tembo, T. P., & Wink, F. (2023). Organizational resources and work engagement as related to new ways of working at private universities in Bangkok. Thailand. ASEAN Journal of Management & Innovation, 10(1), 83–95. https://doi:10.14456/ajmi.2023.7
Zikmund, W. G., Babin, B. J., Carr, J. C., & Griffin, M. (2013). Business research methods. Cengage Learning