declaration - apjor.comapjor.com/files/1466850684.docx · web viewbuilding construction is the...

DECLARATION

I, Dr. Manidipa Chatterjee, is hereby declare that the paper “Study on Employee Engagement in the Construction Sector – A Survey Analysis on Real Estate Companies in Kolkata” is entirely prepared by me and my co-author Ms. Soumi Das on the basis of primary survey on some medium size real estate companies in Kolkata.

To the best of our knowledge and beliefs, this article has neither been submitted to any other research journal nor being presented in any other conference proceedings.

SIGNATURE

(Dr. MANIDIPA CHATTERJEE)

Date: 25.06.2016

1

Title of the Paper:

“Study on Employee Engagement in the Construction Sector – A Survey Analysis on Real Estate Companies in Kolkata”

Name of the Authors

1) Dr. Manidipa Chatterjee

Assistant Professor Institute of Business Management, National Council of Education Bengal(Under Jadavpur University) , Kolkata, India

Email:[email protected]

2) Soumi Das

Faculty member Dinabandhu Andrews Institute of Technology & Management(Under West Bengal University of Technology), Kolkata, India

Email: [email protected]

Address for all future Correspondence:

1. Dr. Manidipa Chatterjee“Sabitri-Villa”142A/54 Basudebpur Road, BakultalaKolkata-700061.

Mobile: 9874823755

2. Soumi Das26/3, Sashi Bhusan Dey Street.Kolkata-700012

Mobile: 9674446990

2

Study on Employee Engagement in the Construction Sector – A Survey

Analysis on Real Estate Companies in Kolkata

by

Dr. Manidipa Chatterjee *

&

Soumi Das**

Dr. Manidipa Chatterjee* , Assistant Professor at Institute of Business Management (under

National Council of Education Bengal) affiliated to Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India

Soumi Das**, faculty member at Dinabandhu Andrews Institute of Technology &

Management, WBUT, Kolkata.

Abstract

This paper focuses on finding the different variables of employee engagement and how these

variables viz. work profile, recognition, working environment, mentoring, empowerment &

alignment with organizational goals varies across the different demographic profile of the

respondents. The survey was conducted on a sample of 96 employees who were engaged in

different administrative and staff functions in the corporate and site offices of two real estate

companies in and around Kolkata engaged in civil construction. The findings of the survey

3

shows that there are considerable variation in terms of the measurement of the indices of

employee engagement with regard to the age, years of experiences of the respondents as well

as according to the designation of the respondents in the present organization. Thus this

study inferred about proper implementation of HR policies and inclusion of more

performance and training oriented HR interventions to have effective employee engagement

at all level both for fresher’s and older employees.

Key Words: Employee Engagement, Employee recognition, Years of experience, designation

1. Background of the Study:

Building construction is the basic of industrial development of a nation. The construction

sector in India is the second largest employer, next only to agriculture. This sector employs

more than 35 million people in India. From 2013 to September 2015, the construction sector

attracted the second highest FDI (foreign direct investment) equity inflow. According to India

Government report, the construction sector is valued at over $126 billion. About half of the

demand comes from the infrastructure sector, and the rest is driven by the real estate sector

and other industrial activities. The industry is fragmented, with a handful of major

companies involved in the construction activities across all segments; medium-sized

companies specializing in niche activities; and small and medium contractors who work on

the subcontractor basis and carry out the work in the field.

It has wide range of activities with employment of a substantial number of workers. They are

mainly working in informal/unorganised sector. In India about 340 million (92%) workers are

in unorganized sector and about half of them are in construction industry. Government of

India and State governments framed Acts and rules for regulation of working conditions and

4

workers in the industry. Social Welfare measures have also been included in some Acts,

specially the social security schemes framed by different governments. As per National

Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganised Sector (NCEUS), workers are victims of

adverse working environmental conditions and subjected to health hazards of occupational

origin. These workers are poor and vulnerable. Their employment is totally temporary in

nature. The socio-economic stresses are one of the major outcomes of their occupation.

Thus the concept of employee engagement is rapidly growing in this sector as various

categories of human resources are engaged in the construction industries which include hard

core fully –skilled, semi-skilled labour as well as employees taking charge of the different

position of the corporate and site office where construction projects are going on.

Today the term engagement is a global phenomenon as it appears to be a combination of job

satisfaction, organizational commitment and employee retention. Indeed, some argue that

engagement is a multidimensional construct, in that employees could be emotionally,

cognitively or physically engaged in their duties.

1a) Types of Employees based on Level of engagement:

However, for an organisation to flourish it is important for the employees to operate at their

full potential, which unfortunately is not the case in most of the organisations. The three

major types of employee engagement are as follows:

Actively Disengaged: This is the first category of people who are unhappy and they

spread unhappiness in the organisation. They are the disease centres in the company

and spread the negative word, provoking and convincing people to leave their jobs.

However they are the ones who stay the longest and removing the perceived people

competition is their thought of getting to the top or next level in the job.

5

Engaged: The second category of people are those who are can be identified with

words like passion, alignment and innovation; which means that they are passionate,

connected to the company and are innovative. They contribute new ideas and turn

ideas into reality. These employees are positive in their outlook and they spread

positivity. They are proactive; can anticipate the future market conditions are prepared

well in advance.

Not Engaged: The third type of employees is the large majority present in

organisations almost 50% in number. They do what is told to them and they like only

one instruction at a time. They put in time but not energy and passion. They may be

either positive or negative in their outlook and opinion about the organisation. They

are not proactive and fail to anticipate what might be required next or what the next

step is? They wait for instruction from their superiors.

1b) Present Status of Employee Engagement and Construction Industry in India:

India will spend millions of dollars housing and infrastructure, according to a new report. It

says that Indian construction sector will grow up to 8 per cent every year for the next decade.

The report by DMG events India, prepared for The Big 5 Construct India 2015 says that total

allocation for infrastructure projects is $45 billion. The Planning Commission of India has

already pledged to invest around $1 trillion in the five-year plan (2012-2017). Indian Ministry

of Roads and Transport outlined plans for $120bn worth of road-widening projects. There are

also plans for $60bn to be invested in India’s ports by 2020.

Again unit sale of construction equipment in India is expected to grow to 82,000 by 2016.

The construction equipment industry's revenues are estimated to reach $22.7bn by 2020 from

$5.1bn in 2012. In addition to reduced building costs, Indian government now has more

6

money to spend, that it had allocated to oil. The Government of India announced its “One

Hundred Smart Cities” initiative in the Union Budget 2014-15. The project involves

development of satellite towns of larger cities by modernising the existing mid-sized cities in

the country. Indian government has allocated $1.2bn for this project.

The Indian real estate market is expected to touch US$ 180 billion by 2020. The housing

sector alone contributes 5-6 per cent to the country's Gross Domestic Product (GDP). In the

period FY08-20, the market size of this sector is expected to increase at a Compound Annual

Growth Rate (CAGR) of 11.2 per cent. Retail, hospitality and commercial real estate are also

growing significantly, providing the much-needed infrastructure for India's growing needs.

Mumbai is the best city in India for commercial real estate investment, with returns of 12-19

per cent likely in the next five years, followed by Bengaluru and Delhi-National Capital

Region (NCR). Similarly real estate is a booming sector in Kolkata. Due to the improved

transportation and communication facilities in Kolkata, its become easier for the real estate

developers to even think of building homes in areas which are not very close to the city

centres. Hence various housing projects of real estate companies have mushroomed in the

various suburban areas of Kolkata both for lower middle class and upper class people in

terms of their affordability.

2. Literature review

Vee and Martin (2002) had highlighted the growing demand for good ethical practice and

professional behaviour in all forms of business, including the construction industry. The

objective of this survey was to provide an indication of the current trends in the

industry though a questionnaire survey of a sample of professionals in an Australian Urban

construction market – the choice of location being due to logistical, time and financial

7

constraints rather than any expectation of a typical levels of unethical practices. Dainty et.

al. (2007) explained the context of construction employment. Their study summaries the

challenges inherent in construction work which have impeded the development of human

resource management within the sector and discusses the understanding of how to improve

the performance of the industry. The study reveals the interplay of structural and cultural

factors which have led to the skills shortages currently impeding the industry’s development.

There is a need for the sector to modernize and formalize its working and employment

practices if performance and productivity improvements are to be achieved. Jones et.al.

(2006) had conducted their study on some of the UK’s leading construction companies. The

findings reveal that each of the companies has its own approach to Corporate Social

Responsibility (CSR) and that there are substantial variations in the nature and the extent of

the reporting process. More specifically the study focuses upon six sets of CSR issues namely

those relating to environment; health and safety; human resources; supply chain management;

customers and communities; governance and ethics. More generally the paper suggests that

although construction companies report their recognition of the importance of CSR and their

commitment to integrate it within their businesses they make relatively limited use of Key

Performance Indicators and have low participation rates in general benchmarking exercises.

Lockwood (2007) depicted in his study that the level of engagement determines whether

people are productive and stay with the organization—or move to the competition. Research

highlighted that the employee connection to the organizational strategy and goals,

acknowledgment for work well done, and a culture of learning and development foster high

levels of engagement. Without a workplace environment for employee engagement, turnover

will increase and efficiency will decline, leading to low customer loyalty and decreased

8

stakeholder value. Ultimately, because the cost of poor employee engagement will be

detrimental to organizational success, it is vital for HR to foster positive, effective people

managers along with workplace policies and practices that focus on employee well-being,

health and work/life balance. Brad Shuck & Rocco (2010) presented the three propositions

for human resource development (HRD) research and practice in their study: first,

environment and person interact to create engagement or disengagement; second, an

employee’s manager plays a critical role in developing engagement; and third, personality

can effect engagement, however, everyone can engage. Rashid et.al.(2011) conducted their

study on an endeavour to investigate the factors persuading Employee Engagement and

linkage of EE to Personal & Organizational Performance. The survey outcome epitomizes

that following factors influence the Employee Engagement which are: decision Making / co-

ordination, employee performance appraisals, performance reward systems, employee

involvement, training and career development, and Human Resource Practices. The results

show that there is significant relationship among employee engagement and decision

making / co-ordination, performance reward systems and employee involvement where as

training and career development and employee performance appraisals are insignificantly

related.

9

3. Objectives of the Study:

This study is based on measuring the employee engagement indices and the how the different

variables of employee engagement vary with the different demographic profile of the

respondents in some of the real estate companies in the city of Kolkata, India.

4. Research Methodology: Data were collected with the help of a structured questionnaire

from two medium size real estate companies engaged in construction and civil projects in

Kolkata and Mumbai. Altogether 100 employees were interviewed from their corporate and

site office in and around Kolkata where construction projects were going on. From that

sample ultimately 96 completed questionnaires were considered for the purpose of the study

and data analysis.

a) Type of Sampling:

Convenient Sampling technique was adopted and the respondents were mostly interviewed

from their corporate and site office, who were all employees of the real estate companies.

Some of the responses were also collected through email or personal telephonic conversation

where it was not possible to go personally due to location problem.

b) Time taken for data collection:

The total time taken for the data collection was almost one and a half month.

c) Reliability of the data set:

10

Cronbach’s alpha coefficient confirms the internal consistency of the set of items of a given

scale. The present data set for the study shows Cronbach’s alpha equal to 0.806. In general,

any value greater than 0.50 is desirable of the Cronbach’s alpha. So, the dataset is quite

reliable for the study. The collected data has been analyzed through SPSS package by using

different statistical tools (viz. descriptive statistics & analysis of variance etc.) for

interpretation of the data. For qualitative analysis of data, Likert’s Summated rating scale had

been used.

5. Data Analysis:

Table 1 : Demographic Profile of the Respondent:

Demographic Characteristics

Class Frequency Percentage(%)

Age (in years) 20 to 30 29 30.2> 30 67 69.8

Exp. In the same industry (in yrs)

< 5 88 91.75 to 10 8 8.3> 10 0 0

Exp. In the present company

<5 25 265 to 15 32 33.3> 15 39 40.6

Designation Lower level 18 18.8Middle level 66 68.8Upper level 12 12.5

The above table shows the demographic characteristics of the 96 respondents which include

both male and female employees. 69.8% of the respondents are mostly having age above 30

years who are working in this construction industry. 91.7% of the sample are having

experience of less than 5 years in the construction industry. Again among the respondent 26%

11

is having experience less than 5 years and 33.3% are having experience between 5 to 15 years

and 40.6% are staying in the present company for more than 15 years. Majority of the

respondents i.e. 68.8% are working in the middle level.

The variables of the employee engagement are measured in a five point summated Likert

Scale. The scores

1 indicates – Strongly Disagree , 2- indicates Disagree, 3- indicates Neutral, 4- indicates

Agreement and 5- indicates- Strongly agreeable

In the tables below the average scores “1-2” indicates strong to average disagreement, “2-3”

somewhat neutral, “3-4” indicates somewhat agreeable, “4-5” indicates fairly to strongly

agreeable.

Table 2: Descriptive Statistics of the Different Attributes of the Employee Engagement

Attributes Frequency of the Respondents (%) Mean S.D. Skew1 2 3 4 5

1. At work do you have autonomy?

3(3.1)

12(12.5)

25(26)

52(54.2)

4(4.2)

3.43 .880 -.893

2. Do you get recognition or praise for doing good work in the last one month?

3(3.1)

21(21.9)

28(29.2)

42(43.8)

2(2.1)

3.19 .913 -.651

3. How much there are opportunities at work to learn & grow?

11(11.5)

21(21.9)

44(45.8)

20(20.8)

0 3.76 .914 -.429

4. Manager or someone at work seems to care about you as a person?

0 0 34(35.4)

31(32.3)

31(32.3)

3.96 .826 .059

5. At work do your opinion seems to count?

3(3.1)

4(4.2)

24(25)

42(43.8)

23(24)

3.81 .954 -.798

6. Are your associates (fellow employees) committed to do quality work?

10(10.4)

4(4.2)

63(65.6)

19(19.8)

3.94 .812 -1.105

12

7. Do you have a best friend at work?

2(2.1)

7(7.3)

45(46.9)

31(32.3)

11(11.5)

3.43 .868 -.099

8.Does your superior at work encourage your development?

0 8(8.3)

30(31.3)

39(40.6)

19(19.8)

3.71 .879 -.173

9.In the last six months, has someone at work talked to you about your progress or given you feedback about your work?

0 2(2.1)

34(35.4)

51(53.1)

9(9.4)

3.69 .666 -.033

10.Do you have easy accessibility of all the resources you need to do your work right now?

0 6(6.3)

35(36.5)

48(50)

7(7.3)

3.58 .720 -.212

11. Do you know what is expected of you at work?

0 6(6.3)

20(20.8)

52(54.2)

18(18.8)

3.85 .799 -.503

12. Does the mission/purpose of your company make you feel that your job is important?

0 4(4.2)

8(8.3)

72(75)

12(12.5)

3.95 .614 -1.091

13.Are the pay and benefits of your organization is comparable with same type of companies

0 10(10.4)

36(37.5)

40(41.7)

10(10.4)

3.52 .820 -.068

14.Do you want to continue in the organization for the next two years

0 7(7.3)

37(38.5)

36(37.5)

16(16.7)

3.63 .847 .040

In Table 2: The descriptive statistics of the different attributes of the employee engagement in

the construction sector shows that among all respondents are fairly agreeable with the

statement like manager caring about their employees i.e. mentoring (mean value 3.96) ,

commitment of the peers towards their work (mean value 3.94), alignment of individual goal

with organizational goals (mean value 3.95) . Regarding opportunity of recognition and

praise (least mean value 3.19) respondents are less agreeable.

13

Identification of the Employee Engagement Variables:

All the 14 attributes from the employee engagement survey questionnaire are clubbed up into

six variables as follows:

1. Work Profile, 2. Recognition 3. Working Environment & Culture, 4. Mentoring,

5. Empowerment, 6. Alignment with organizational values.

Table 3: Description of the Computed Variables:

Computed Variables Attributes SymbolType of Work or Work Profile

Do you have easy accessibility of all the resources you need to do your work right now?

Vwork

Do you know what is expected of you at work?Recognition at Work place

Do you get recognition or praise for doing good work in the last one month?

Vrecog

At work do your opinion seems to count? Are the pay and benefits of your organization is comparable with same type of companies

Working Environment & Culture

Are your associates (fellow employees) committed to doing quality work?

Venv

Do you know what is expected of you at workMentoring Manager or someone at work seems to care about

you as a person?Vmentor

Does your superior at work encourage your development?

In the last six months, has someone at work talked to you about your progress or given you feedback about your work?

Empowerment At work do you have autonomy? VempHow much there are opportunities at work to learn & grow?

Alignment of individual values with organizational

Does the mission/purpose of your company make you feel that your job is important?

Valign

14

values Do you want to continue in the organization for the next two years

Table 4: Mean Value of the Computed Variables of Employee engagement

Descriptive Statistics- Computed Variables

NMinimu

mMaximu

m Mean

Std. Deviatio

nVwork 96 2.00 5.00 3.71 .639Vrecog 96 2.00 4.67 3.51 .680Venv 96 2.00 5.00 3.69 .638Vmentor 96 2.67 5.00 3.79 .634Vemp 96 2.00 5.00 3.59 .731Valign 96 2.50 5.00 3.79 .583Valid N (listwise)

96

Graph 1: Overall Mean Values of the Employee Engagement Variables

Vwork Vrecog Venv Vmentor Vemp Valign3.35

3.43.45

3.53.55

3.63.65

3.73.75

3.83.85

Mean Values

Overall mean value of the six variables of the employee engagement shows that mentoring

and alignment of individual with organizational values are showing higher values towards

more agreement in a Likert scale rather than other variables. But employee recognition part

15

is totally neglected in construction industry and also there are less empowerment and

autonomy in work.

Employee Engagement - Age wise

Table 5: Table showing Mean Values of Employee engagement variables Age wise

Total N=96

Variables Between 20 to 30 (N=29)

> 30 (N=67)

Work Profile 4.15 3.52Recognition 3.58 3.47Working Environment 3.77 3.65Mentoring 4.00 3.70Empowerment 4.01 3.41Alignment with organizational values

3.91 3.74

Graph 2: Mean values of Employee engagement variables Age wise

Vwork Vrecog Venv Vmentor Vemp Valign0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

(20 to 30 yrs )>30 yrs

16

Table 6: Mean Values of the Employee Engagement Variables according to the Experience of the Respondents Organization wise.

Total N=96

Variables <5 yrs(N=25)

5 to 15 yrs(N=32)

>15 yrs(N=39)

Work Profile 3.94 3.65 3.62Recognition 3.20 3.77 3.49Working Environment

3.38 4.01 3.62

Mentoring 3.52 4.01 3.79Empowerment 3.50 3.87 3.43Alignment with organizational values

3.78 3.70 3.88

Graph 3: Employee Engagement Indices according to the Years of Experience of the Respondents in the Present Organization .


0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

<5 yrs 5 to 15 yrs >15 yrs

17

Table 7: Mean Values of the Employee Engagement Variables according to the Years of Experience in the Construction Industry:

Total N=96

Variables <5 yrs(N=88)

5 to 10 yrs(N=8)

>10 yrs(N=0)

Work Profile 3.67 4.18 0Recognition 3.49 3.66 0Working Environment

3.64 4.18 0

Mentoring 3.75 4.25 0Empowerment 3.60 3.56 0Alignment with organizational values

3.79 3.81 0

Graph 4: Employee Engagement Indices according to the Years of Experiences of the Respondents in the Construction Industry


0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

<5 yrs 5 to 10 yrs >10 yrs

Table 8: Mean Values of the Employee Engagement Variables according to the Designation in the Present Organization.

Total N=96

Variables Lower Level (N=18)

Middle Level(N=66)

Upper Level(N=12)

Work Profile 3.27 3.84 3.66Recognition 3.66 3.48 3.41Working 3.83 3.71 3.33

18

Environment Mentoring 3.88 3.81 3.52Empowerment 3.69 3.65 3.16Alignment with organizational values

3.47 3.84 4.04

Over all Avg.mean value of the indices

3.633 3.721 3.52


0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Lower Middle Upper

Graph 5: Employee Engagement Indices according to the Designation of the Employees.

Table 9: One way Anova Showing the Variation of the Employee Engagement Variables according to the Age of the Respondents

Sum of Squares df Mean Square FSig.(p-value)

Vwork Between Groups 7.914 1 7.914 24.004 .000*Within Groups 30.992 94 .330Total 38.906 95

Vrecog Between Groups .239 1 .239 .513 .476Within Groups 43.751 94 .465Total 43.990 95

Venv Between Groups .287 1 .287 .703 .404Within Groups 38.398 94 .408Total 38.685 95

Vmentor Between Groups 1.744 1 1.744 4.484 .037*Within Groups 36.561 94 .389Total 38.304 95

19

Vemp Between Groups 7.270 1 7.270 15.696 .000*Within Groups 43.540 94 .463Total 50.810 95

Valign Between Groups .568 1 .568 1.683 .198Within Groups 31.721 94 .337Total 32.289 95

*indicates significance level at 0.05 level

From Table 9 it can be inferred that some of the variables like work profile, mentoring and

empowerment highly varies across the age of the respondents in the surveyed population

where their level of significance i.e. p value is less than 0.05.

Table 10: One way Anova Showing the Variation of the Employee Engagement Variables according to the Years of Experience of the Respondents in the Same Organization.

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F

Sig.(p-value)

Vwork Between Groups 1.669 2 .834 2.084 .130Within Groups 37.238 93 .400Total 38.906 95

Vrecog Between Groups 4.588 2 2.294 5.414 .006*Within Groups 39.402 93 .424Total 43.990 95

Venv Between Groups 5.944 2 2.972 8.441 .000*Within Groups 32.741 93 .352Total 38.685 95


Vemp Between Groups 3.720 2 1.860 3.674 .029*Within Groups 47.090 93 .506Total 50.810 95

Valign Between Groups .589 2 .294 .863 .425Within Groups 31.700 93 .341Total 32.289 95


20

Similarly from Table 10 we see that recognition, working environment, mentoring and

empowerment highly varies across years of experiences of the respondents in the present

company.

Table 11: One way Anova Showing the Variation of the Employee Engagement Variables according to the Years of Experience of the Respondents in the Same Industry.

Sum of Squares df Mean Square FSig (p-value)



Venv Between Groups 2.137 1 2.137 5.495 .021*Within Groups 36.548 94 .389Total 38.685 95


Vemp Between Groups .012 1 .012 .021 .884Within Groups 50.798 94 .540Total 50.810 95

Valign Between Groups .002 1 .002 .006 .937Within Groups 32.287 94 .343Total 32.289 95


From Table 11 it is revealed that working environment and mentoring highly varies across

the experiences of the respondents in the same industry.

21

Table 12: One way Anova Showing the Variation of the Employee Engagement Variables According to the Designation of the Respondents in the Present Company.

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.



Venv Between Groups 1.954 2 .977 2.473 .090Within Groups 36.731 93 .395Total 38.685 95

Vmentor Between Groups 1.051 2 .526 1.312 .274Within Groups 37.253 93 .401Total 38.304 95

Vemp Between Groups 2.589 2 1.294 2.497 .088Within Groups 48.221 93 .519Total 50.810 95

Valign Between Groups 2.744 2 1.372 4.319 .016*Within Groups 29.545 93 .318Total 32.289 95


Similarly from table- 12 we see that work profile as well as the alignment of individual

values with that of organization highly varies with the designation of the respondents in the

present companies.

6. Findings:

i) Age wise analysis of the engagement indices shows that lack of proper employee

recognition or motivation and lack of proper working environment and work-

culture may be the problem areas for fresh entrants whose ages are less than 30.

But for middle and higher age group greater than 30, the main problem areas are

22

also less recognition and less autonomy in their work areas rather than other

employee engagement variables.

ii) Organization wide experiences of the respondents shows that those whose

working experiences in the present company are between 5 to 15 years are in a

better position in terms of the employee engagement indices rather than the other

two groups of respondents. Lack of proper work culture, recognition and lack of

autonomy may be the problem areas for new or fresh candidates as well as for

those who have already spend more than 15 years in this sector. In the initial

years of work the responsibility and authority assigned to individual is usually

limited. That may lead to lower level of engagement at job. With rise in time on

job he gets more authority and freedom to take decision, which usually leads to

high engagement.

iii) Salary and wages usually rise with years of experience. Even for doing similar

work, a person with long service period gets higher salary than his juniors. It lead

to motivation and individual may like to put more effort in his work which led to

higher job engagement. But freshers’ of less than 5 years of experience have

higher risk taking ability. These employees constantly look for better

opportunities around them and this lead to lower engagement level. With rise in

age, priorities changes. People get into a family life and from there onwards the

security becomes more important to them. They usually avoid switching jobs

frequently and try to engage in their present job only. This has lead to higher

engagement indices of employees between 5 to 15 years of organization

experience in the construction sector.

23

iv) Like any other manufacturing or service industry, in the construction sector also

the career growth shrinks as one rises on the top. Because organization have less

positions at top level rather than middle level and this lead to saturation of career

growth at middle management level after 15 years leading to decrease in

empowerment and proper recognition.

v) In this sample most of the respondents i.e. 91.7% are working less than 5 years

and only 8.3% are working almost 5 to 10 years in the same industry i.e.

construction sector. Respondents working for more than 10 years in the same

industry are almost non-existent in the surveyed population. Respondent those

who are working for a longer period of time i.e. more than 5 years are in a better

position in terms of almost all areas of employee engagement where mean values

of the indices are higher rather than the fresher’s or less than 5 years of experience

coming from the same industry except in areas of empowerment where the indices

are almost equal in both the categories. So the inference that can be drawn from

this analysis is that with more years at work, a person gets more familiar with

work. He is able to handle the problems at work more effectively and this

perfection leads to higher recognition at work. This leads to increase in

engagement.

vi) Designation wise it is also revealed that those who are working at the middle level

their overall employee engagement index in terms of the all six engagement

variables are slightly higher than lower or upper level employees.

24

vii) Just like any other sector here in construction industry organization have less

positions at top level rather than middle level. This has lead to saturation of career

growth when a person has already spend almost 15 years in the same organization

leading to decrease in engagement.

viii) One way Anova analysis also established the fact that most of the employee

engagement variables in one or other way highly varies across the various

demographic profile of the respondents like age, years of experience in the present

organization, industry wise experience as well as with the present hierarchy or

designation of the respondent in the company.

7. Suggestions:

Majority of the employee engagement level is low at the beginning of the career in

construction sector and then it rises slowly and reaches maximum at the middle level where

we see maximum employee engagement index and then again it drops down for those

employees who have already spend more than 15 years in the same company. We all know

that this sector is labour intensive including indirect jobs providing employment opportunities

to the contractual employees also. Organization can utilize several measures to frame proper

HR policies for the employees which may reduce the employee attrition specially

knowledgeable and technically sound employees and skilled labour to the competitive firm.

Policy should be more attractive for the fresher’s to assign challenging assignments to

young executives which may stimulate them and keep engaged. For this attractive salaries

and perks and performance based incentives are the need of the hour.

25

More decentralization of activities to create sense of better empowerment or autonomy to

the line managers or project head.

Implementation of more employee recognition schemes specially for fresher’s as well as

for those who are working for more than 10 years in the company.

Inclusions of employee protection, welfare and safety schemes especially for contractual

employees in different on-site construction projects are essential.

Construction Project Management models include overall planning, coordination and

control of the project according to the client’s requirements. Implementation of the HR

policies at every level of the project execution requires proper training & development

module according to the need of the company is essential.

For older employees regular up gradation of their skills through new training modules

are essential to reduce their redundancy and for middle level management empowerment

and employee recognition schemes are essential in order to reduce attrition of valuable

employees to the competitive firm.

Project managers, contract administrators, superintendant and field engineers have very

effective role to play in terms of engagement of employees in their respective work-field

not only in on-sites project but also in coordination with different corporate roles for

project execution.

Maintaining healthy work culture, clarification and allocation of the present job

responsibilities through intermittent job analysis, proper monitoring & mentoring of the

fresh entrants are the most important activities to be taken care of by the HR department

of the company to have an effective employee engagement.

26

8. Limitation of the Study & Scope of further Research

This study is conducted on employees who are attached with the general administration

and on-site project administration and coordination activities. If the same study can be

carried out on the skilled and semi-skilled labourers and blue collar workers at

construction sites, then more specific problem areas of workers’ engagement can be

found out. Due to the long distance some of the respondents were contacted over

telephone to know their views regarding their nature of work and problem areas. Besides

this study can be extended and linked with different aspects of employee engagement and

satisfaction with strategic human resource activities of the company for better

organizational performance.

9. References:

Bradshuk, M., Rocco, S.T. and Albornoz, C.A.(2011). Exploring Employee

Engagement from the Employee Perspective: implications for HRD, Journal of

European Industrial Training, vol.35, no.4.

Dainty, A., Grugulis,I. and Langford, D.(2007). Understanding Construction

Employment: The Need for a Fresh Research Agenda, Personnel Review, Vol.36,

no.4, pp.501-509.

Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F.L and Hayes, T.L.(2002). Business Unit Level Relationship

between Employee Satisfaction, Employee Engagement and Employee Outcomes:

Meta Analysis, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.87. no.2, pp.268-279.

Lockwood, N.R. (2007) . Leveraging Employee Engagement for Competitive

Advantage: HR’s Strategic Role, SHRM, Research Quarterly

27

Rashid, H.A, Asad, A. and Asraf, M.M. (2011). Factors Persuading Employee

engagement and Linkage of EE to Personal & Organizational Performance,

Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, Vol.3, no.5,

September issue.

Singh, L.P. and Panda, B. ( 2013 ). Employee Engagement in Indian Scenario: A Case

Study of Tata Teleservices Limited (TTSL). DRIEMS Business Review, vol.1, no.1

Udayangani, K., Amaratunga, D., Haigh, R. and Rameezden, R.(2006). Attitude and

Perception of Construction Work force on Construction Waste in Srilanka,

Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, vol.17, no.1,

pp.57-72.

Vee,C. and Skitmore, M.(2003) Professional Ethics in the Construction Industry,

Engineering, Construction & Architectural Management- Open access archive of

QUT Research Literature, vol.10, no.2, pp-117-127.

Accessed from- http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00004119

Websites:

https://www.google.co.in/search?q=research+article+on+construction+industry&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&ei=kJdnV9DpLJaEoAOdmYvQBw

https://scholar.google.co.in/scholar?q=research+paper+on+employee+engagement&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiHytzeiLbNAhXEQ48KHVuyAZQQgQMIJjAA

https://scholar.google.co.in/scholar?start=10&q=research+paper+on+employee+engagement&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&as_vis=1

https://www.google.co.in/search?q=article+paper+on+employee+engagement+in+construction+industry&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&ei=pJpnV8zWC9iBogP6ubmYAw

28












http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/real-estate/is-thisright-time-to-investpropertykolkata_951338.html

29



declaration - apjor.comapjor.com/files/1466850684.docx · web viewbuilding construction is the...

Documents