Work Engagement in India: Psychometric Evaluation of Utrecht Work Engagement Scale

Ms. Urvashi Sharma; Ms. Bhawna Rajput

doi:https://doi.org/10.17492/manthan.v4i02.11461

Submit Manuscript Login / Register Subscribe

Home Page

Editorial Advisory Board

Mission, Aims & Scope

Current Issue

Work Engagement in India: Psychometric Evaluation of Utrecht Work Engagement Scale

Urvashi Sharma, Bhawna Rajput

Vol 4, Issue 2, July - December 2017 | Pages: 54-64 | Research Paper

Article has been added to the cart.View Cart (0)

https://doi.org/10.17492/manthan.v4i02.11461

Published Online: November 30, 2017

Author Details ( * ) denotes Corresponding author

1. Urvashi Sharma, Associate professor, Department of Commerce, Delhi School of Economics, University of Delhi, Delhi, India (urvashi13@gmail.com)

2. * Bhawna Rajput, Research Scholar, Department of Commerce, Delhi School of Economics, University of Delhi, Delhi, India (bhawnarajput.16@gmail.com)

This paper aims to analyse the psychometric properties of Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) as developed by Schaufeli et al. (2002) in an India sample. It analyses two models of work engagement i.e. one-factor model, where work engagement is considered as a single construct and three-factor model, which considers three aspects of engagement (vigour, dedication and absorption) of both 17-item UWES and shortened version 9-item UWES. Psychometric properties including factor validity and internal consistency were assessed by an empirical study of 100 employees working in information technology companies in India. The results of confirmatory factor analysis reveal that for India, 9-item UWES and single construct work engagement scale is better than the three factor model. The study further revealed that internal consistency of complete scale was found to be consistent than the three sub-scales for both 9-item UWES and original 17-item UWES. The present study provides an insight as to which measure of UWES works better in context to India.

Keywords

Work engagement; Psychometric study; Factorial validity; Reliability; Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES)

Alok, K., & Israel, D. (2012). Authentic leadership & work engagement. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 47(3), 498-510.
Balducci, C., Fraccaroli, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2010). Psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 26(2), 143-149.
Chaudhary, R., Rangnekar, S., &Barua, M. (2011). Relation between human resource development climate and employee engagement: Results from India. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 7(4), 664-685.
De Bruin, G. P., Hill, C., Henn, C. M., & Muller, K. P. (2013). Dimensionality of the UWES-17: An item response modelling analysis. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 39(2), 1-8.
Fong, T. C., & Ho, R. T. (2015). Dimensionality of the 9-item Utrecht Work Engagement Scale revisited: A Bayesian structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Occupational Health, 57(4), 353-358.
Hallberg, U. E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2006). “Same same” but different? Can work engagement be discriminated from job involvement and organizational commitment?. European psychologist, 11(2), 119-127.
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692-724.
Klassen, R. M., Aldhafri, S., Mansfield, C. F., Purwanto, E., Siu, A. F., Wong, M. W., & Woods-McConney, A. (2012). Teachers’ engagement at work: An international validation study. The Journal of Experimental Education, 80(4), 317-337.
Littman-Ovadia, H., & Balducci, C. (2013). Psychometric properties of the Hebrew version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 29(1), 58-63.
Nerstad, C. G., Richardsen, A. M., & Martinussen, M. (2010). Factorial validity of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) across occupational groups in Norway. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 51(4), 326-333.
Pati, S. P., & Kumar, P. (2010). Employee engagement: Role of self-efficacy, organizational support & supervisor support. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 46(1), 126-137.
Ravichandran, K., Arasu, R., & Kumar, S. A. (2011). The impact of emotional intelligence on employee work engagement behavior: An empirical study. International Journal of Business and Management, 6(11), 157-169.
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2003). UWES–Utrecht work engagement scale: Test manual. Unpublished Manuscript: Department of Psychology, Utrecht University, 8.
Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701-716.
Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 71-92.
Shimazu, A., Schaufeli, W. B., Kosugi, S., Suzuki, A., Nashiwa, H., Kato, A., & Goto, R. (2008). Work engagement in Japan: validation of the Japanese version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Applied Psychology, 57(3), 510-523.
Simbula, S., & Guglielmi, D. (2013). I am engaged, I feel good, and I go the extra-mile: Reciprocal relationships between work engagement and consequences. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de lasOrganizaciones, 29(3), 117-125.
Vazquez, A. C. S., Magnan, E. D. S., Pacico, J. C., Hutz, C. S., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2015). Adaptation and validation of the Brazilian version of the Utrecht work engagement scale. Psico-USF, 20(2), 207-217.
Zecca, G., Györkös, C., Becker, J., Massoudi, K., De Bruin, G. P., & Rossier, J. (2015). Validation of the French Utrecht Work Engagement Scale and its relationship with personality traits and impulsivity. European Review of Applied Psychology, 65(1), 19-28.