INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 113
Addressing Gaps: Impact of Work Engagement on Job
Performance
Indu Priyangika Weerakkody
1*
, Nidhi Agarwal
2
, Gamage Dinoka Nimali Perera
3
1,2
Faculty of Social Science and Humanities, Lincoln University College, Malaysia
3
Department of Human Resource Management, University of Sri Jayawardhanapura, Sri Lanka
DOI : https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2024.131015
Received: 27 October 2024; Accepted: 03 November 2024; Published: 13 November 2024
Abstract: The purpose of this study was to systematically review the existing literature on the impact of work engagement on job
performance. One objective was to examine work engagement and job performance definitions to develop working definitions for
both concepts. The primary objective was to investigate gaps using a research gap classification model. Accordingly, key studies
regarding the impact of work engagement on job performance were meticulously examined through a systematic literature review
with a meta-analysis, which involved investigating research gaps. The study referred to databases such as Google Scholar and
ResearchGate to examine the impact of work engagement on job performance, focusing on publications from 2013 to 2023. Initially,
33 documents were referred and only 16 were left after screening as the sample. Tables and graphs were utilized to synthesize
research gaps across various domains. According to the gap’s classification model, four types were investigated; empirical gap,
knowledge gap, methodological gap, and population gap. This study systematically identified and classified research gaps,
providing a platform for future investigations that enhance existing knowledge. Considering the limitations of the study, several
directions for future research are suggested.
Keywords: Gaps, Impact, Job Performance, Systematic Literature Review, Work Engagement
I. Introduction
Human resources are one of the most valuable assets of an organization (Wardiansyah et al., 2024; Linus, 2022; Arıkan & Çankır,
2019). Thus, the success of an organization may fluctuate based on the behaviours exhibited within the organizational context.
According to Dhir and Shukla (2019), the misbalance between an organization and an employee's expectations results in
disengagement, ultimately causing a decline in employee performance. This suggests that various factors, both associated with the
organization and the employees, are interconnected and contribute to the occurrence of this phenomenon. Therefore, exploring the
connection between work engagement and job performance is a crucial area of study that has received significant attention because
of its important impact on organizational effectiveness (Nkansah et al., 2023). Accordingly, the archival method was applied to
study the definitions of work engagement and job performance to develop working definitions of them. The archival method is
considered a practical and advanced tool that researchers can effectively utilize in singular or mixed-method studies (Das et al.,
2018). Moreover, they have argued that it improves the robustness of business and organizational research. Then the researchers
can obtain thorough, complex, and trustworthy insights from past data. However, Miles (2017) has highlighted the scarcity of
theories and studies specifically focused on identifying gaps. Moreover, he has acknowledged that identifying gaps is a common
difficulty for novice researchers. Ajemba and Arene (2022) argued that acknowledging research gaps provides an opportunity to
engage in new or improved research. Accordingly, it is crucial to identify the gaps to enhance the comprehension of work
engagement and its impact on job performance. The identified research gaps in this study present an opportunity for scholars and
practitioners to make significant contributions in terms of valuable insights and novel findings. Therefore, the question to be
addressed through this study is how work engagement impacts job performance, and what are the gaps in the existing research on
this connection? The research objectives addressed in this study are,
1. To review existing literature on the definitions of work engagement and job performance through archival method and to
develop working definitions for them
2. To examine the key studies on the impact of work engagement on job performance by applying a systematic literature
review method
3. To investigate research gaps by using Miles’ (2017) research gap classification model, of the impact of work
engagement on job performance
II.Materials and Methods
Gaps
One of the primary purposes of the literature review is to identify research gaps (Tsoulfas, 2021; Miles, 2017). Tsoulfas (2021)
defines a gap as a need for further examination; it is the same as a missing piece of information or an oversight in one's field of
study that allows for future research. These gaps bring to light opportunities that require additional research to expand
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 114
understanding, settle confusion, or apply new techniques to topics that have been around for a long time. Miles (2017) introduced
a new approach delineating seven core research gaps, which are characterized as follows,
1. An Evidence Gap (Contradictory Evidence Gap) emerges when study results, while individually conclusive, present
contradictions when viewed in a broader context.
2. A Knowledge Gap (Knowledge Void Gap) is characterized by the absence of desired research findings, leaving a void in
understanding.
3. Practical-Knowledge (Action-Knowledge) Gap refers to the conflict that arises when professionals' actual behaviours
deviate from their prescribed behaviours.
4. The Methodological Gap refers to disputes stemming from the impact of methodology on research outcomes.
5. Empirical Gap (Evaluation Void Gap) refers to the conflict that pertains to the necessity of evaluating or empirically
validating research findings or propositions.
6. The Theoretical Gap (Theory Application Void Gap) focuses on addressing theoretical deficiencies in previous research.
7. A Population Gap occurs when underserved populations remain unstudied, leading to gaps in knowledge about their
experiences and needs.
Work Engagement
The terms 'personal engagement', 'job engagement', and 'employee engagement', are often used interchangeably in research to
describe the concept of work engagement (Iddagoda et al., 2015). Table 1 includes the definitions of work engagement by applying
the archival method.
Table 1 Definitions of Work Engagement
Author(s),
Year
Definitions
Comments
(Khan, 1990)
Personal engagement refers to the synchronization of
individuals' personal identities with their roles and
duties within the organization.
The term "personal engagement" refers to how
individuals adjust to align with their roles in an
organization, encompassing both engagement and
disengagement.
(Maslach et
al., 2001)
Engagement was defined as the antithesis of burnout,
characterized by a state of vigour, involvement, and
efficiency.
Engagement was seen as the opposite of burnout.
(Schaufeli &
Bakker, 2004)
Engagement is a positive mental state linked to work,
characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption.
Work engagement and burnout are clearly separate
concepts.
(Macey &
Schneider,
2008)
Employee engagement is described as an ideal
condition aligned with organizational objectives,
encompassing involvement, dedication, passion,
enthusiasm, focused effort, and vitality. It involves
both behavioural actions and attitudinal aspects.
Employee engagement excludes models of
behaviour centred around withdrawal, maladaptive
behaviour, or other forms of disengagement from
consideration. It comprises two primary
components: attitudinal and behavioural.
(Shuck &
Wollard,
2010)
Employee engagement refers to the cognitive,
emotional, and behavioural state of an individual
employee, directed towards achieving desired
organizational objectives.
Employee engagement encompasses three
dimensions: cognitive, emotional, and behavioural.
It is often regarded as an antecedent, influencing
various outcomes within the organizational context.
(Robbins &
Judge, 2013)
The degree to which an individual is enthusiastic,
satisfied, and involved in the work they perform.
Engaged employees are deeply passionate about
their work and feel strongly connected to their
organization.
(Iddagoda et
al., 2015)
Employee engagement refers to the extent to which
a worker invests themselves mentally, emotionally,
and behaviourally in their workplace and the
organization overall.
Employees engage with their jobs and organization,
as researchers identify three dimensions of
employee engagement: cognitive, emotional, and
behavioural involvement.
(Fadhilah et
al., 2022)
Employ engagement ensures the employees’
commitment to achieving the goals of the
organization.
This helps the employees with the resources and
support to achieve the goal.
Source: Developed by the researchers based on literature
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 115
In 1990, Khan employed the phrase "personal engagement" at the outset of the concept. According to Saks (2006), there exists a
significant difference between individual job engagement and organizational engagement. According to Bakker and team (2008),
work engagement and employee engagement do not exhibit a significant difference. However, Iddagoda and team (2015) favoured
employee engagement within both the job and the organization over work engagement. Employee engagement stands as a primary
focus for practitioners in psychology and business fields (Mercurio, 2015), yet it lacks a precise definition (Iddagoda et al., 2015).
Chandel (2018) expresses the same, that there is a lack of consensus on a standard definition for employee engagement. It is
highlighted in Table 1.
Khan introduced the term "personal engagement" in 1990, describing how individuals either include or exclude themselves when
fulfilling job roles. He coined this term for the first time, defining it as the process of aligning individual members of an organization
with their responsibilities within the organization. Furthermore, in order to effectively carry out the function, personal engagement
necessitates a connection on all levels, including the physical, cognitive, and emotional categories. This indicates that persons are
not only physically present and actively immersed in the tasks they are performing, but that they are also cognitively focused and
emotionally invested in the activities. As a result of such engagement, individuals are able to discover meaning and purpose in their
jobs, which indicates that there is a strong congruence between their personal and professional identities. When individuals believe
that their personal beliefs and ambitions are mirrored in their professional obligations, they experience higher levels of motivation,
job satisfaction, and overall performance. This alignment leads to higher levels of overall performance.
In 2001, Maslach and team differentiated engagement from other constructs in organizational psychology such as organizational
commitment, job satisfaction, and job involvement and defined engagement as the opponent of burnout, characterized by vigour,
involvement, and efficiency. However, the absence of burnout does not necessarily imply that the employee is engaged in work.
Although not being burned out shows that someone is not suffering from the negative consequences of ongoing stress and fatigue,
it does not imply that they are involved in their profession. Even though employees are not showing signs of burnout, they may
lack the enthusiasm, drive, and sense of fulfilment that define true engagement. Hence, these are two distinct terms. Accordingly,
engagement represents a positive, fulfilling state of mind at work, characterized by vigour, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli &
Bakker, 2004).
Later, Macey and Schneider in 2008, deliberately omit models of behaviour centred around withdrawal, maladaptive behaviour, or
other disengagement phenomena. Their definition of employee engagement, as outlined in 2008, entails a desired state that
encompasses both behavioural and attitudinal components. This state aligns with organizational goals and is characterized by
involvement, dedication, passion, enthusiasm, concentrated effort, and energy.
Next, the emphasis has been moved from organizational goals to organizational outcomes. The definition of employee engagement,
as articulated by Shuck and Wollard (2010), portrayed it as "an individual employee’s cognitive, emotional, and behavioural state
directed toward desired organizational outcomes". This concept implied that employee engagement had been considered a
significant factor by relating the cognitive, behavioural, and emotional components of employee engagement with the outcome. It
was recognized by combining these aspects that involvement was more than just a mental state and included visible behaviours and
emotional commitment. According to this comprehensive view, emotionally, behaviorally, and cognitively engaged workers could
benefit the company and the individual. Among such results could be better performance, more commitment from the organization,
and higher levels of production. Therefore, companies could use employee engagement as a strategic instrument to promote success
and a healthy workplace culture by realizing the complex nature of engagement and its possible effects.
Robbins and Judge (2013) defined employee engagement by emphasizing the results that occur with higher engagement levels.
Accordingly, it pertains to an individual's degree of involvement, satisfaction, and excitement towards their work (Robbins & Judge,
2013). The importance of highly engaged employees, who demonstrate enthusiasm for their work and possess a strong sense of
connection to their organization, is underscored. This underscores the significance of personnel who not only comprehend and
concur with the organization's objectives and principles but also actively invest their vigour and enthusiasm in their realization.
Employees who are exceptionally engaged are more inclined to exhibit elevated levels of motivation, dedication, and productivity,
which ultimately contribute to favourable results for the entire organization.
However, as per Iddagoda et al., (2015), their definition was slightly different. Employee engagement was described as the degree
of mental, emotional, and behavioural commitment that an individual showed toward their workplace and the organization overall.
The level of behavioural, emotional, and mental dedication a person has to their job and the company as a whole is known as
employee engagement. This thorough description includes the behavioural component of actively investing time and effort to
accomplish common goals, the emotional component of feeling connected to and invested in the work, and the cognitive component
of comprehending and aligning with the organization's aims. It represents a comprehensive understanding of engagement that
extends beyond contentment with one's work to include a more profound degree of commitment and involvement, all of which are
essential for creating a productive workplace and accelerating organizational success.
According to Fadhilah et al., (2022), employee engagement provides a systematic framework and resources to motivate and
empower employees to achieve their maximum potential. Employee engagement is beyond mere productivity enhancement; it
fosters a supportive organizational culture in which personnel feel valued and associated with the company's mission.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 116
Considering all, the current study adopts the following working definition (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004) of work engagement;
engagement signifies a favourable and gratifying mental state at work, characterized by strength, commitment and intense
concentration.
Theoretical explanations suggest a correlation between work engagement and employee performance (Bakker & Leiter, 2010;
Gruman & Saks, 2011). Bakker and Leiter (2010) highlight it as follows;
“The energy and focus inherent in work engagement allow employees to bring their full potential to the job. This energetic focus
enhances the quality of their core work responsibilities. They have the capacity and the motivation to concentrate exclusively on
the tasks at hand.”
(Bakker & Leiter, 2010)
This implies that individuals who are exceptionally invested in their tasks are more inclined to effectively carry out their duties and
make constructive contributions to the overall success of the organization.
Job Performance
Terms such as ‘work performance’, ‘individual work performance’, and ‘employee performance’ are employed interchangeably to
refer to job performance (Ramawickrama et al., 2017). Practical usage frequently includes the interchangeability of these terms.
Nevertheless, it is critical to acknowledge that they symbolize unique notions characterized by subtle distinctions in significance
and ramifications. Although there may be instances of overlap, a comprehensive comprehension of their distinct definitions can
facilitate more accurate correspondence and focused approaches to improving the welfare of employees and the achievements of
the organization. Applying the archival method, definitions of job performance were added to Table 2.
Table 2 Definitions of Job Performance
Author(s), Year
Definition
Comments
(Lawler &
Porter, 1955)
Taken into consideration for both the
amount and quality of the worker's
production.
Recognition for excellent performance boosts future
performance, with satisfaction as a result, not the
cause.
(Bass, 1980)
Team productivity is determined by
aggregating the individual contributions
made by each member of the team.
Individual contribution entails the allocation of
individual capabilities, the assignment of roles, and
the effective organization of these contributions.
(Hunter, 1986)
In every occupation, general cognitive
ability plays a pivotal role in influencing
job performance.
Cognitive ability acts as a reliable predictor of job
performance, regardless of whether the job is
classified as 'manual' or 'mental'.
(Murphy and
Kroeker, 1989)
Job performance is viewed as an activity
aimed at achieving specific goals.
Achieving goals depends on performance dimensions
delineated in the context of work behaviours.
(Campbell et
al., 1996)
Job performance is equivalent to
behaviour.
The behaviours are observable and measurable.
(Motowidlo et
al., 1997)
The overall expected organizational value
for each specific behavioural occurrence
that an individual engages in within a set
timeframe.
The assumption is that job performance encompasses
behaviour, unfolds episodically, undergoes
assessment, and is multifaceted.
(Motowidlo,
2003)
The aggregate expected value of an
individual's distinct behavioural events
over a specific duration.
Performance is a fundamental aspect of behaviour.
(Pushpakumari,
2008)
The degree of effort and energy dedicated
to an employee's job duties.
It is presumed that the skills and abilities of
employees stay reasonably stable.
(Campbell &
Wiernik, 2015)
Genuine attempts are made by individuals
to support the goals of the organization.
It encompasses all individual acts that, in varying
degrees, help the organization achieve its objectives.
(Augustrianto et
al., 2018)
A record of the activities and tasks
finished in a certain amount of time.
It is measurable.
(Jabeen &
Rahim, 2021)
A monetary and non-monetary result
is achieved by an organization.
Measured giving monetary values.
Source: Developed by the researchers based on literature
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 117
According to Lawler and Porter (1955), employee job performance encompassed both the quality and quantity of their work output,
reflecting how well they fulfilled their assigned duties within the organization. This suggested that the job performance of an
organization was impacted by the conduct of its employees, which in turn was influenced by the particular job responsibilities they
engage in.
According to Bass (1980), there had been a notable emphasis on evaluating job performance, particularly with the identification of
a set of variables linked to team task performance. Team performance was viewed as dependent on the extent, interaction, and
utilization of capabilities possessed by its members, both individually and collectively. This framework highlighted that the
combined individual contributions from each member determined overall team productivity. This framework included how
responsibilities were assigned, how individual competencies were distributed, and how these were integrated into the team structure
(Bass, 1980).
Hunter (1986) pinpointed general cognitive ability as a crucial element influencing job performance outcomes. This factor was a
cornerstone predictor of an individual's job effectiveness. Hunter (1986) emphasized the paramount significance of learning,
arguing that it remained crucial even for seemingly minor tasks. Furthermore, he posited that job efficacy was constrained by the
learning process. Notwithstanding this, a deliberate effort was being made to shift the emphasis from simple task execution to the
development of a taxonomy of job performance that was solidly grounded in theoretical frameworks. This transition acknowledged
the multifaceted nature of job performance, which included elements such as innovation, collaboration, and adaptability in addition
to task completion. As a result, it demonstrated a more holistic comprehension of the efficacy of an organization.
In 1973 James, and 1976 Smith, as cited in Murphy and Kroeker (1989) engaged in deliberation regarding whether the domain of
job performance should be defined as behaviour or the result of behaviour. Job performance was comprised of work-related
behaviours that demonstrated goal-directed activities and may differ depending on the specific responsibilities assigned. This
underscored the constantly changing nature of job performance, in which the actions of individuals were focused on attaining
particular goals and were impacted by the duties and obligations given to them in their positions. This leads to the development of
specific characteristics applicable to both general positions and specific occupations (Viswesvaran & Ones, 2000).
Campbell, Gasser and Oswald, (1996) defined job performance as synonymous with behaviour. Within this particular framework,
behaviour referred to quantifiable and observable actions performed by personnel, which served as an indication of their degree of
input. This underscored the concrete characteristics of behaviours that were observable, quantifiable, and evaluable to gauge the
performance of an individual in a professional setting.
Job performance is a multifaceted concept that includes behavioural, episodic, and evaluative elements. It was defined as the
aggregated expected value that an individual's specific behavioural episodes, carried out within a designated period, contribute to
the organization (Motowidlo et al., 1997). Accordingly, job performance involved actions, behaviours, and outcomes employees
had undertaken or produced within an organization, impacting organizational goals. Effective and efficient performance contributes
to organizational success and productivity, emphasizing its significance in driving business success. Therefore, understanding and
optimizing job performance were crucial aspects of organizational management and development (Viswesvaran & Ones, 2000).
According to Motowidlo (2003), job performance was the cumulative anticipated worth of an individual's specific behavioural
actions throughout a predetermined timeframe. This clarification underscored it as an attribute that differentiated behaviours
demonstrated by identical individuals at various moments and by distinct individuals.
Pushpakumari (2008) defined performance as the level of dedication and effort an employee applied to their assigned tasks. In
2008, she posited that employee skills and abilities tend to remain relatively consistent over time. Subsequently, the literature
focused on evaluating individual performance based on this assumption. According to Campbell and Wiernik (2015), individual
performance was an essential prerequisite for the collective performance of any team, unit, organization, or economic sector. This
underscored the vital significance of individual performance to the organization. Considering all factors, in 2015, they defined job
performance as the concrete actions that employees execute to accomplish the goals of the organization. This definition emphasized
the pragmatic aspect of job performance, highlighting the specific duties and conduct that contributed to the achievement of
objectives and results for the organization.
Augustrianto et al., (2018) and Jabeen and Rahim (2021) highlight that job performance is measurable. According to Augustrianto
et al,. (2018), it measures the activities and the tasks completed within a given period of time while Jabeen and Rahim (2021) give
monetary value to them.
The notion of job performance has evolved since its initial focus on evaluating the quantity and quality of production to now
encompass various factors such as the contributions of individuals and teams, cognitive capabilities, goal orientation, observable
behaviours, organizational value, effort, and alignment with organizational objectives. This development signifies an expanded
comprehension of job performance that incorporates ineffable elements like collaboration, problem-solving, and congruence with
the mission and values of the organization, in addition to concrete work outcomes. Then the working definition of job performance
is, the behaviours and actions, both financial and non-financial, revealed by employees and employers within a specified timeframe,
aimed at achieving the objectives of the organization.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 118
Systematic Literature Review
Systematic literature review is a methodical way of combining scientific knowledge to answer a certain research objective (Lamé,
2019). Khan et al., (2003) outlined a methodical five-step process for conducting a systematic literature review. The steps are,
coming up with review questions, finding applicable research, judging the quality of the studies that were chosen, putting all the
evidence together, and figuring out what the results mean.
First, clear and two focused questions were crafted to guide the review's scope. They were, what are the key studies available
on
the impact of work engagement on job performance? And what are the research gaps identified in the impact of work engagement
on job performance?
Then, an extensive search was conducted to find relevant studies. A careful approach was adopted, with
emphasis on accessing credible web databases, notably Google Scholar and ResearchGate. These databases were chosen to ensure
access to the most relevant and recent articles from 2013 to 2023. Recognizing the dynamic nature of research, the review was
limited to the past decade to incorporate the latest insights and developments.
The search targeted specific terms like 'work engagement,' 'job performance,' 'research gaps,' and 'impact' to retrieve directly
relevant information. Several articles during the last decade were selected from the two databases. Additionally, three electronic
books were consulted to complement the search process. All of the studies that are included were carried out in the English language
and are accessible as full-text papers. However, one duplicate article, ‘The Impact of Employee Engagement on Job Performance
of Executives in a Selected Five-star Hotel in Colombo District, Sri Lanka’ was identified and excluded. Titles containing phrases
such as 'influence,' 'impact,' or 'effect' were given particular attention during screening. Abstracts were reviewed if these terms were
not explicitly mentioned in the title to confirm relevance. Ten articles were excluded due to irrelevance to the topic, while six lacked
relevant data. Once identified, these studies were evaluated for their quality and rigour. When assessing the eligibility of the articles,
manuscripts that did not address 'limitations' and 'areas for future investigation' were excluded to improve the reliability of selected
articles. Finally, sixteen articles were included in the study. The flow diagram illustrating the included studies is presented in Figure
1.
Fig.1. A flow diagram of the included studies
Webster and Watson (2002) stressed the significance of utilizing tables and figures to effectively convey critical findings in
academic research. Following this principle, tables were strategically integrated into this study for multiple purposes. They served
as concise summaries of key findings regarding the impact of work engagement on job performance, facilitating quick
comprehension and comparison of various studies. Additionally, tables delineate research methodologies employed across different
studies, offering insights into diverse approaches taken by researchers. Furthermore, tables are used to identify and elucidate
research gaps within the literature, aiding in the discernment of areas lacking empirical evidence or consistency. This comprehensive
approach leverages tables as both information conveyors and tools for advancing scholarly understanding. Table 3 highlights key
studies on the impact of work engagement on job performance, aligning with Miles's (2017) research gap classification model.
III. Results
This methodological framework aligns with Miles's (2017) classification, which systematically identifies and analyses limitations
and areas necessitating additional research. Following Miles' (2017) research gap classification model, four gaps were identified
and summarized in Table 3: empirical gap, knowledge gap, methodological gap, and population gap.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 119
Table 3 Key Studies on the Impact of Work Engagement on Job Performance
Author(s) and
Year
Description
Country
Research
Type
Gaps for future
research
1.
(Nkansah et
al., 2023)
Analysed how employee
engagement impacts
performance results.
Ghana
Cross-
section
study
Population gap
Methodological gap
Empirical gap
2.
(Özbezek &
Ege, 2022)
Investigated the function
of work engagement as a
mediator between the
impact of member-leader
exchange and job
performance.
Turkey
Cross-
sectional
study
Methodological gap
3.
(Ton et al.,
2021)
Employee engagement
has a significantly
positive impact on job
performance.
Vietnam
Survey
method
Empirical gap
Knowledge gap
4.
(Ngwenya &
Pelser, 2020)
Investigated the impact of
work engagement on
job performance.
Zimbabwe
Quantitative
approach
Methodological gap
Population gap
5.
(Wang &
Chen, 2020)
Explored the impact of
co-worker and customer
incivility on the work
engagement and job
performance of frontline
employees.
Taiwan
Empirical
study
Knowledge gap
6.
(Arıkan &
Çankır, 2019)
Work engagement proved
to be a more powerful
predictor of employee
performance.
Turkey
Cross-
sectional
Empirical gap
7.
(Ismail et al.,
2019)
For employee
engagement to affect job
performance, it must
foster employee
creativity.
Lebanon
Cross-
sectional
study
Methodological gap
Empirical gap
8.
(Perera &
Wijewardene
, 2019)
Improved job
performance is a direct
result of more employee
engagement.
Sri Lanka
Explanatory
study
Empirical gap
9.
(Pongton &
Suntrayuth,
2019)
Examined the influence
of communication
satisfaction, employee
engagement, job
satisfaction, and job
performance.
Thailand
Quantitative
study
Empirical gap
10.
(Memon et
al., 2018)
Work engagement and
high-performance work
practices influenced
employee performance.
Pakistan
Quantitative
method
Empirical gap
11.
(Sendawula
et al., 2018)
Explored the effects of
employee engagement
Uganda
Cross-
sectional
Methodological gap
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 120
and training on employee
performance.
and
correlational
12.
(Sekhar et al.,
2017)
Examined how work
engagement affected job
performance through the
implementation of
flexible human resource
management strategies.
India
Explorative
study
Empirical gap
Methodological gap
Knowledge gap
13.
(Omar et al.,
2017)
Concluded that personal
engagement significantly
influences employee
performance.
Malaysia
Quantitative
study
Empirical gap,
Methodological gap
14.
(Dajani,
2015)
Unlike organizational
commitment, employee
engagement has a
significant impact on job
performance.
Egypt
Quantitative
approach
Empirical gap,
Methodological gap
15.
(Perera &
Shashiranga,
2015)
By enhancing employee
engagement, a company
can boost job
performance.
Sri Lanka
Analytical
study
Empirical gap,
Methodological gap
16.
(Yalabik et
al., 2013)
The effect of work
engagement on job
performance is positive
and significant.
UK
Cross-
lagged
research
design
Methodological gap
Source: Developed by the researchers based on literature
Next, a meta-analysis was conducted. The findings were synthesized to provide a coherent overview of the evidence. Table 4
presents a summary of the article count, the proportion of articles comprising the total, the identities of the authors who contributed
to the articles, and the publication years associated with the gaps in the data. Finally, the synthesized evidence was interpreted to
identify patterns, inconsistencies, and gaps in the literature. Identification of research gaps focused on specific contexts, types of
applied research methods, theories utilized, and designated areas for future investigation. This procedure enhanced efficiency in
identifying gaps, aligning with Miles's (2017) categorization.
The systematic presentation provides a concise overview of the current state of research, facilitating the recognition of prominent
authors and publication patterns linked to particular areas of research gaps.
Table 4 An Overview of Identified Research Gaps and The Details of the Articles
Research Gap
No. of
Articles
Gap %
Author(s) & Year
Empirical Gap
11
68.75%
(Nkansah et al., 2023), (Ton et al., 2021), (Arıkan & Çankır,
2019), (Ismail et al., 2019), (Perera & Wijewardene, 2019),
(Pongton & Suntrayuth, 2019), (Memon et al., 2018), (Sekhar et
al., 2017), (Dajani, 2015), (Omar et al., 2015), (Perera &
Shashiranga, 2015)
Knowledge Gap
03
18.75%
(Ton et al., 2021), (Wang & Chen, 2020), (Sekhar et al., 2017)
Methodological
Gap
10
62.5%
(Nkansah et al., 2023), (Özbezek & Ege, 2022), (Ngwenya &
Pelser, 2020), (Ismail et al., 2019), (Sendawula et al., 2018),
(Sekhar et al., 2017), (Dajani, 2015), (Omar et al., 2015), (Perera
& Shashiranga, 2015), (Yalabik et al., 2013)
Population Gap
02
12.5%
(Nkansah et al., 2023), (Ngwennya & Pelser, 2020)
Source: Developed by the researchers based on data
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 121
The bar chart illustrates the proportion of publications that are pertinent to each of the research gaps that have been emphasized.
The visual depiction provides a concise and unambiguous synopsis of the allocation of research emphasis among various gaps,
facilitating prompt discernment of domains that receive greater or lesser scholarly interest.
Fig. 2 Bar chart of the identified types of gaps and their percentages
This systematic approach was applied ensuring a comprehensive examination of research gaps in the current knowledge on the
impact of work engagement on job performance. Moreover, it provided insights for researchers and practitioners.
IV. Discussion
Empirical gap
The research studies listed in Table 4 were conducted in various contexts, each offering unique insights. Considering the study by
Nkansah and team (2023) was carried out amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, it is advisable for future research to explore diverse
countries or cultures, particularly in developing nations. Additionally, for a more comprehensive comprehension, future research
should expand its scope to encompass other sectors of the country's economy, as the study exclusively concentrated on micro, small,
and medium-sized enterprises in Ghana. By broadening the scope of the research to include a more diverse array of industries and
business sizes, significant insights could be gained regarding the determinants that impact the performance and sustainability of
organizations in multiple sectors.
Similarly, the study by Ton and team (2021) regarding work engagement, job performance, and best practices could benefit from
expansion by replicating the research and engaging respondents from multiple sources. Additionally, while researchers like Arıkan
and Çankır (2019), Perera and Wijewardene (2019), Pongton and Suntrayuth (2019), and Memon and Teanm (2018) have
emphasized the significance of undertaking comparable research across various industries and organizations to obtain a more
profound understanding. Subsequent investigations ought to adhere to this suggestion to enhance the comprehension of their results.
Through the investigation of a wide range of contexts and environments, scholars are able to reveal intricate patterns and dynamics
that enhance the overall comprehension of organizational phenomena and provide valuable insights for the development of
evidence-based practices in diverse sectors.
Sekhar with the team (2017) found that work engagement impacts job performance through flexible human resource management
within the Information and Technology industry in India. The significance of expanding comparable inquiries to encompass
additional service-oriented sectors, including education, hospitality, and telecommunications, was underscored in order to facilitate
further scholarly inquiry. Through an examination of these varied sectors, scholars can acquire a more comprehensive
comprehension of how organizational dynamics, leadership methodologies, and performance indicators differ among service-
oriented contexts. Broadening the focus of research, would not only contribute to the existing body of literature but also offer
practical and policy-oriented practitioners and decision-makers in the service sector valuable insights into improving organizational
efficacy and sustainability.
Perera and Shashiranga (2015) suggest that moderating and mediating variables must be investigated to comprehend the relationship
between work engagement and job performance. Further investigation is warranted to identify potential mediating or influencing
factors that could affect the correlation between work engagement and job performance. Such research would enhance our
comprehension of the intricate workings of organizations and the results that employees achieve. This type of investigation can
provide valuable insights for the creation of customized interventions and approaches aimed at improving work engagement and
maximizing productivity in a variety of settings. Similarly, Dajani (2015) emphasized the substantial impact that employee
engagement has on the job performance of personnel in the banking industry in Egypt. This implies that similar inquiries should be
conducted across various sectors in Egypt. This recommendation emphasizes the significance of comprehending the ways in which
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
Empirical Gap Knowledge Gap Methodological Gap Population Gap
Identified Gaps %
Type of Research Gap
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 122
the dynamics of employee engagement differ among organizations and industries. Through the implementation of analogous
inquiries across diverse industries, scholars can reveal sector-specific variables that might impact the correlation between employee
engagement and job performance. This, in turn, could pave the way for more precise and efficacious interventions aimed at
augmenting organizational efficiency and employee welfare.
Finding an empirical gap, in accordance with Miles (2017), is essential to guarantee the validity of research and emphasizes the
need to be assessed for confirmation. The prevalence of empirical gaps in the body of current research is demonstrated in Figure 2,
which displays a high percentage of reviewed studies that require further investigation or validation assessment. This graphic
illustration emphasizes how urgently research is needed to close them. In addition, acknowledging this gap can facilitate the process
of persuading funding agencies and academic committees of the significance of the study.
Knowledge gap
Ton et al., (2021) investigated employee engagement and effective internal public relations techniques to improve job
performance. Highlighting a new direction, they (2021) expressed that it would be innovative to use quasi-experiments to
investigate internal public relations of the aviation industry in Vietnam. The study (Hendrik et al., 2021) can be furthered by future
researchers looking at other factors like skill, knowledge, motivation, leadership, job happiness, and stress that affect employee
performance. These elements add to a thorough knowledge of the intricate interactions of organizational, environmental, and human
elements that affect the results of employee performance. Through investigation of these characteristics, scholars can produce fresh
insights and further the body of knowledge in the area, which will eventually result in better methods and plans for maximizing
employee performance and organizational success.
In 2020, Wang and Chen examined how rudeness from customers and coworkers affects frontline employees' job performance and
work engagement. As stated in the article, this study is the first to provide empirical support for the idea that workplace engagement
mediates the association between rude customers and job performance. The identification of work engagement as a mediator
provides important insights for organizations seeking to mitigate the detrimental consequences of customer mistreatment on
job performance and well-being. It also sheds light on the underlying mechanisms via which consumer incivility influences
employee outcomes. Therefore, this study contributes novel insights to the current body of literature by revealing how work
engagement acts as a mediator between job performance and consumer incivility. According to Gui et al., (2022), more investigation
is needed to investigate additional mediating mechanisms and moderating effects related to incivility. Future research should
therefore examine whether work passion or social support significantly moderates the impacts of workplace incivility on frontline
employees' job performance and work engagement. Hence adds new knowledge.
Figure 2 demonstrates that a knowledge gap is present in 18.75% of the reviewed articles. This implies that there is insufficient or
incomplete knowledge in some areas of the field. Researchers can expand the breadth and depth of knowledge in their field and
gain a more thorough understanding of complex issues by identifying and examining these understudied areas. Furthermore, filling
in knowledge gaps keeps research efforts from becoming redundant.
Methodological gap
According to Table 4, empirical (Wang & Chen, 2020), exploratory (Sekhar et al., 2017), explanatory (Perera & Wijewardene,
2019), and quantitative (Ngwenya & Pelser, 2020; Omar et al., 2015; Dajani, 2015) research types were applied to investigate the
impact of work engagement on job performance. In 2023, Nkansah and colleagues examined the impact of work engagement on
job performance through a cross-sectional study. They also stressed the significance of employing longitudinal and mixed methods
study designs to improve comprehension in this domain. This proposal emphasizes the importance of thorough and meticulous
research methods that accurately reflect the ever-changing nature of employee experiences over time. It also suggests the inclusion
of many data sources and analytical tools to ensure a full analysis. Longitudinal studies enable researchers to monitor shifts in
employee engagement, work performance, and other pertinent factors over various time intervals. This facilitates a more thorough
investigation of cause-and-effect linkages and temporal patterns. Incorporating mixed methods approaches allows researchers to
synthesize findings from both quantitative and qualitative data, resulting in a more thorough and nuanced comprehension of intricate
phenomena, such as work engagement and its influence on job performance.
Many of the studies listed in Table 4 were conducted using a cross-sectional approach. However, among them, five studies (Yalabik
et al., 2013; Dajani, 2015; Perera & Shashiranga, 2015; Ismail et al., 2019; Ngwenya & Pelser, 2020; Özbezek & Ege, 2022)
recommended future investigations utilizing a longitudinal framework. Nonetheless, for a comprehensive understanding of the issue
at hand, Sendawula and team (2018) advocated for a mixed methods approach when examining the impact of work engagement on
job performance within the health sector, particularly across four mission hospitals in Uganda. Perera and Shashiranga (2015) also
emphasized the importance of employing a mixed methods approach over a purely quantitative one in their analytical study on the
impact of employee engagement on job performance. Thus, longitudinal and mixed methods investigations are becoming
increasingly necessary in future studies. Longitudinal and mixed methods studies can answer complex research questions, reveal
causal linkages, and shed light on employee engagement, job performance, and organizational outcomes.
Nkansah et al., (2023) proposed using a bigger sample size in future research to improve reliability. Research findings should have
strong statistical power and generalizability. A greater sample size reduces random variability and improves study dependability,
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 123
boosting validity and trustworthiness. A larger, more diversified sample improves representativeness, allowing researchers to derive
more significant conclusions and practice implications. In addition, Sekhar and the team (2017) proposed that by increasing the
sample size and narrowing the focus to specific industries, more generalized conclusions might be drawn. In research design,
balancing sample size and specificity may be beneficial. Özbezek and Ege (2022) echoed this sentiment, recommending the
collection of additional samples and replication of outcomes to improve generalizability. They further suggested that research
should encompass samples from various sectors to extend the applicability of the findings.
As shown in Figure 2, a significant 62.5% of the studies under examination exhibit a methodological gap. According to Miles's
(2017) definition of Methodological Gap, enhancing the precision of research designs and methodologies can yield outcomes that
are more applicable to a wide range of populations and contexts. Through methodological optimization, scholars can enhance the
efficiency of data collection, interpretation, and analysis. Scholars can enhance the reliability, validity, and applicability of their
findings and thereby contribute to the advancement and improvement of their respective disciplines through the enhancement of
research methods.
Population gap
The study conducted by Nkansah et al., (2023) focused on selected micro, small, and medium enterprises in Kumasi, Ghana's
second-largest city. Due to this, it is therefore possible that the results may differ in various regions of the nation. Therefore, it is
suggested that further research be conducted in other regions of Ghana to ensure a more extensive applicability. By broadening the
geographical range of the investigation, regional variations can be more effectively captured, leading to a more comprehensive
comprehension of the determinants that impact the phenomena being examined. By adopting this methodology, the results will be
more applicable and substantial in a variety of domestic contexts, thereby bolstering their generalizability.
Similarly, the research on the impact of work engagement on job performance by Perera and Shashiranga (2015) was conducted
among executives at a specific five-star hotel in the Colombo District of Sri Lanka. As a result, they emphasize the need to extend
the research to include other employees in the hotel sector. Additionally, future studies could select hotel sector organizations to
further enhance the generalizability of the results.
The study conducted by Ngwenya and Pelser, (2020) on the effects of psychological capital on job satisfaction, employee
engagement, and employee performance in Zimbabwe's industrial sector concluded that higher levels of engagement result in
increased employee performance. However, to ensure the generalizability of these findings, the study suggests examining
populations with a broader reach and more diverse characteristics. Therefore, the study emphasizes that the population gap is an
important factor to be taken into account in future research. To address this gap, it is important to ensure that future research
incorporates a wide range of participants that accurately represent the population. This will improve the capacity to apply the
findings to a larger context. By directing their attention towards a wider demographic, researchers can gain a deeper understanding
of the diverse effects and interactions within different groups, resulting in more thorough findings.
According to Figure 2, 12.5% of the reviewed studies show a population gap. Understanding these gaps allows researchers to more
effectively generalize events. Addressing population gaps ensures that study findings are comprehensive and reflective of the full
population, rather than simply a subset.
V. Conclusions
By examining the scholarly literature regarding the definitions of work engagement and job performance, it becomes evident that
both concepts have undergone significant evolution. The concept of work engagement has evolved from a limited emphasis on
individual identity and congruence with occupational responsibilities to a more comprehensive and nuanced perception
distinguished by its multifaceted character. This modern perspective encompasses elements such as enthusiasm, commitment,
integration, and congruence with the goals of the organization, which are indicative of cognitive, affective, and behavioural aspects.
In the same way, job performance evaluation has transformed its previous paradigm, which predominantly focused on the output's
quantity and quality, to a more modernized approach. This transition underscores the intricate and diverse characteristics of work
engagement and job performance, acknowledging their pivotal significance in attaining success for the organization.
According to Miles (2017), a comprehensive review of the current literature has revealed four distinct gaps: empirical gap,
knowledge gap, methodological gap, and population gap, all related to the impact of work engagement on job performance. This
framework furnishes guiding principles for interdisciplinary investigations of addressing research gaps. By employing an
interdisciplinary framework, a multitude of factors and dimensions are taken into account, thereby facilitating a more
comprehensive comprehension and rigorous examination of these concepts across a range of contexts.
Subsequent researchers may be inspired by the findings of this study to resolve the aforementioned research gaps and carry out
beneficial surveys. As a result, the article functions as a significant point of reference for scholars, offering valuable perspectives
and direction for prospective inquiries. Furthermore, this investigation serves as a practical demonstration of how Miles' (2017)
framework can be employed to categorize deficiencies in research. This model facilitates the methodical identification and
classification of gaps in current research, providing a structured framework for subsequent investigations to expand upon and make
significant contributions to the existing wealth of knowledge.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 124
VI. Limitations
The ongoing inquiry involves certain constraints that require recognition. The main goal of this study is to investigate the impact
of work engagement on job performance, utilizing Miles's (2017) research gap categorization approach. Further research could
improve the comprehensiveness of the study by examining the potential mediating and moderating effects on the correlation
between work engagement and job performance. In addition, the study was limited in scope as it only used two databases to find
relevant publications and focused on a narrow time period of 10 years, especially from 2013 to 2023. In order to enhance efficacy
and encompass a wider range of research, forthcoming studies could augment the number of databases consulted and prolong the
duration under examination. Implementing these modifications would enable a more comprehensive analysis of the subject and
enhance the comprehension of the impact of work engagement on job performance.
Acknowledgement
Gratitude to the supervisors for the immense support extended by them throughout the preparation of this manuscript.
Declaration of Interest Statement
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
References
1. Ajemba, M. N., & Arene, E. C. (2022). Research gaps for future research and their identification. World Journal of
Advanced Research and Reviews, 16(1), 575–579. https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2022.16.1.1062
2. Arıkan, S., & Çankır, B. (2019). Examining Work Engagement and Job Satisfaction Variables in their Relations with Job
Performance and Intention to Quit. Journal of Business Research - Turk, 11(2), 1133–1150.
https://doi.org/10.20491/isarder.2019.661
3. Augustrianto, A., Rahayu, A., & Adi Wibowo, L. (2018). The Effects of Culture on Employee Performance (A Study in
The Agent of Tele Account Management Unit, PT. Telecommunication Indonesia Regional VII Makassar). International
Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7(4.38), 1279–1281. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.38.27805
4. Bakker, A. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2010). Work Engagement: A Handbook of Essential Theory and Research. Work
Engagement: A Handbook of Essential Theory and Research. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203853047
5. Bakker, A. B., Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., & Taris, T. W. (2008). Work engagement: An emerging concept in
occupational health psychology. Work and Stress, 22(3), 187–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370802393649
6. Bass, B. M. (1980). Team productivity and individual member competence: Vol. L (Issue 4, pp. 431–504).
7. Campbell, J. P., Gasser, M. B., & Oswald, F. L. (1996). The Substantive Nature of Job Performance Variability. In K. R.
Murphy (Ed.), Individual Differences and Behavior in Organizations (First Edit, pp. 258–299). Jossey-Bass Inc.,
Publishers, 350 SansomeStreet, San Francisco, California 94104. https://gwern.net/doc/psychology/personality/1996-
murphy-individualdifferencesandbehaviorinorganizations.pdf
8. Campbell, J. P., & Wiernik, B. M. (2015). The Modeling and Assessment of Work Performance. Annual Review of
Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 47–74. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-
111427
9. Chandel, P. (2018). The Evolution of Employee Engagement, A Unique Construct. International Journal of Human
Resource Management and Research, 8(6), 199–216. https://doi.org/10.24247/ijhrmrdec201822
10. Dajani, M. A. Z. (2015). The Impact of Employee Engagement on Job Performance and Organisational Commitment in
the Egyptian Banking Sector. Journal of Business and Management Sciences, 3(5), 138–147.
https://doi.org/10.12691/jbms-3-5-1
11. Das, R., Jain, K. K., & Mishra, S. K. (2018). Archival research: a neglected method in organization studies. Benchmarking,
25(1), 138–155. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-08-2016-0123
12. Dhir, S., & Shukla, A. (2019). Role of organizational image in employee engagement and performance. Benchmarking,
26(3), 971–989. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-04-2018-0094
13. Fadhilah, Z. N., Ahadiat, A., & Mardiana, N. (2022). The Effect of Employee Engagement on Employee Performance
with Job Satisfaction as an Intervening Variable in Expeditionary Companies. International Journal of Business and
Management Invention (IJBMI), 11(6), 37–43. https://doi.org/10.35629/8028-1106033743
14. Gruman, J. A., & Saks, A. M. (2011). Human Resource Management Review Performance management and employee
engagement. 21, 123–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2010.09.004
15. Gui, W., Bai, Q., & Wang, L. (2022). Workplace Incivility and Employees’ Personal Initiative: A Moderated Mediation
Model of Emotional Exhaustion and Meaningful Work. SAGE Open, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221079899
16. Hendrik, G. E., Fanggidae, R. E., & Timuneno, T. (2021). Effect of Work Engagement on Employee Performance.
Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, 197(1), 660–665. https://doi.org/10.46643/ijmb.v1i1.6
17. Hunter, J. E. (1986). Cognitive ability, cognitive aptitudes, job knowledge, and job performance. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 29(3), 340–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(86)90013-8
18. Iddagoda, A., Opatha, H. H. D. N. P., & Gunawardana, K. (2015). Employee Engagement: Conceptual Clarification from
Existing Confusion and Towards an Instrument of Measuring It. SSRN Electronic Journal, December, 1–26.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2699798
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 125
19. Ismail, H. N., 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.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-02-2018-0052
20. Jabeen, R., & Rahim, N. (2021). Exploring the effects of despotic leadership on employee engagement, employee trust
and task performance. Management Science Letters, 11, 223–232. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2020.8.012
21. Khan, K. S., Kunz, R., Kleijnen, J., & Antes, G. (2003). Five steps to conducting a systematic review. Journal of the Royal
Society of Medcine, 96, 118–121. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC539417/pdf/0960118.pdf
22. Khan, W. A. (1990). Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagement and Disengagement at Work. Academy of
Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724.
23. Lamé, G. (2019). Systematic Literature Reviews : An Introduction. July. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.169
24. Lawler, E. E., & Porter, L. W. (1955). The Effect of Performance on Job Satisfaction (pp. 20–28).
https://www.academia.edu/1404855/The_effect_of_performance_on_job_satisfaction
25. Linus, U. M. O. (2022). Effect of Safety Practices On Job Performance Of Health Care Workers In Enugu State University
Teaching Hospital, Enugu, Nigeria. April-June, 2021. https://seahipaj.org/journals-ci/june-2021/IJIHCR/full/IJIHCR-J-1-
2021.pdf
26. Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008). The Meaning of Employee Engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology,
1(1), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2007.0002.x
27. Macey, W., & Schneider, B. (2015). The Meaning of Employee Engagement. March 2008, 2–30.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2007.0002.x
28. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. 397–422.
29. Memon, S. B., Soomro, S. B., & Kumar, S. (2018). Assessing the work engagement, work practices and work performance
in banks. Journal of Administrative and Business Studies, 4(3), 165–184. https://doi.org/10.20474/jabs-4.3.5
30. Mercurio, Z. A. (2015). Affective Commitment as a Core Essence of Organizational Commitment: An Integrative
Literature Review. Human Resource Development Review, 14(4), 389–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484315603612
31. Miles, D. A. (2017). A taxonomy of research gaps: Identifying and defining the seven research gaps. Journal of Research
Methods and Strategies, 2017, 1–15. https://www.academia.edu/download/55369101/Miles 2017 - Research Gaps.pdf%0
Ahttps://www.academia.edu/35505149/RESEARCH A Taxonomy of Research Gaps Identifying and Defining the Seven
Research Gaps
32. Motowidlo, S. J. (2003). Job Performance. In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen, & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), John Wiley & Sons,
Inc. (Vol. 3). https://doi.org/10.2307/2522923
33. Motowidlo, S. J., Borman, W. C., & Schmit, M. J. (1997). A theory of individual differences in task and contextual
performance. In Human Performance (Vol. 10, Issue 2, pp. 71–83).
34. Murphy, K. R., & Kroeker, L. P. (1988). Dimensions of job performance. Testing: Theoretical and Applied Perspectives,
619, 218–247. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA194951.pdf
35. Ngwenya, B., & Pelser, T. (2020). Impact of psychological capital on employee engagement, job satisfaction and employee
performance in the manufacturing sector in Zimbabwe. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 46(August), 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v46i0.1781
36. Nkansah, D., Gyimah, R., Kwasi Annan, J., & Agyemfour-Agyemang Sarpong, D. (2023). The Effect of Employee
Engagement on Employee Performance in Ghana’s MSMEs Sector During Covid-19: The Moderating Role of Job
Resources. Journal of Social Science, 4(3), 677–697. https://doi.org/10.46799/jss.v4i3.453
37. Omar, K., Anuar, M. M., Yaakop, A. Y., Halim, M. A. S. A., Harun, M., & Hau, T. C. (2017). The influence of personal
engagement and time management on employees’ job performance. Advanced Science Letters, 23(4), 3009–3012.
https://doi.org/10.1166/asl.2017.7637
38. Özbezek, B. D., & Ege, T. (2022). The Mediating Role of Work Engagement in the Effect of Leader-Member Exchange
on Job Performance. Yönetim ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 20(4), 366–386. https://doi.org/10.11611/yead.1140300
39. Perera, G. D. N., & Shashiranga, R. G. (2015). The Impact of Employee Engagement on Job Performance of Executives
in a Selected Five-Star Hotel in Colombo District, Sri Lanka. Journal of Business and Management Sciences, 3(5), 138–
147. http://pubs.sciepub.com/jbms/3/5/1
40. Perera, G. D. N., & Wijewardene, L. (2019). The Impact of Employee Engagement on Employee Performance in Sri
Lankan Licenced Commercial Banks. Rajarata Journal of Social Sciences Volume, 4(2), 27–40.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349103243_THE_IMPACT_OF_EMPLOYEE_ENGAGEMENT_ON_EMPL
OYEE_PERFORMANCE_IN_SRI_LANKAN_LICENSED_COMMERCIAL_BANKS
41. Pongton, P., & Suntrayuth, S. (2019). Communication Satisfaction, Employee Engagement, Job Satisfaction, and Job
Performance in Higher Education Institutions. ABAC Journal Vol.39 No.3 (July-September, 2019 Pp 90-110), 39(3), 90–
110.
42. Pushpakumari, M. D. (2008). The Impact of Job Satisfaction on Job Performance : An Empirical Analysis. City Forum,
9(1), 89–105. http://202.11.2.113/SEBM/ronso/no9_1/08_PUSHPAKUMARI.pdf
43. Ramawickrama, J., Opatha, H. H. D. N., & PushpaKumari, D. (2017). A Synthesis towards the Construct of Job
Performance. International Business Research, 10(10), 66. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v10n10p66
44. Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2013). Organizational Behavior (15th ed.). Pearson Education, Inc., publishing as Prentice
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIII, Issue X, October 2024
www.ijltemas.in Page 126
Hall.
45. Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(7),
600–619. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940610690169
46. Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Utrecht work engagement scale Preliminary Manual Version 1.1. In
Occupational Health Psychology Unit Utrecht University (Issue December). https://doi.org/10.1037/t01350-000
47. Sekhar, C., Patwardhan, M., & Vyas, V. (2017). 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
48. Sendawula, K., Kimuli, S. N., Bananuka, J., & Muganga, G. N. (2018). Training, employee engagement and employee
performance: Evidence from Uganda’s health sector. Cogent Business and Management, 5(1), 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2018.1470891
49. Shuck, B., & Wollard, K. (2010). Employee engagement and HRD: A seminal review of the foundations. In Human
Resource Development Review (Vol. 9, Issue 1, pp. 89–110). https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484309353560
50. Ton, H. N. N., Nguyen, P. V., Vuong, L. T., & Tran, H. Q. (2021). Employee engagement and best practices of internal
public relations to harvest job performance in organizations. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 19(3), 408–420.
https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.19(3).2021.33
51. Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (2000). Perspectives on Models of Job Performance. International Journal of Selection
and Assessment, 8(4), 216–226. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00151
52. Wang, C. H., & Chen, H. T. (2020). Relationships among workplace incivility, work engagement and job performance.
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, 3(4), 415–429. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-09-2019-0105
53. Wardiansyah, D. ., Indrawati, N. K., & Kurniawati, D. . (2024). The effect of employee motivation and employee
engagement on job performance mediated by job satisfaction. International Journal of Research in Business and Social
Science, 13(1), 220–231.
54. Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review. MIS
Quarterly, 26(2), xiii–xxiii. https://doi.org/10.1.1.104.6570
55. Wyllie, T. . (2021). The Importance of Research Gaps. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 232(5), 680–681.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2021.02.003
56. Yalabik, Z. Y., Popaitoon, P., Chowne, J. A. &, & Rayton, B. A. (2013). Work engagement as a mediator between
employee attitudes and outcomes. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, February 2013.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.763844