Dissertation Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Dissertation - Essay Example In addition, each of the three major articles is assigned three minor literature sources that compare and contrast the main ideas presented in the major articles. These articles are analysed below focusing on their value for achieving the objectives of the proposed study. The first article is that of Siddhanta and Roy (2010). The specific article focuses on the relationship between employee engagement and productivity. The examination and the evaluation of this relationship is one of the study’s objectives. The article has been considered as important for the proposed study because of the following reasons: a) it helps to explore one of the study’s objectives, meaning especially the involvement of employee engagement in enhancing productivity in institutions; b) it presents a thorough analysis of the role of engagement within modern organizations. Also, engagement, as a concept, is explained in the context of its relationship with different aspects of the organization, such as ‘productivity, profitability and customer satisfaction’ (Siddhanta and Roy, 2010, p. 172). In all institutional settings, performance measure is specifically important because it is the direct reflection of what the turnover, output or productivity levels of the institution would be. Again, human resource managers and other leaders of institutions and organisations find it prudent to measure performance because it is the only means by which they can assess whether or not they are having the needed returns made in the investments they make in enhancing human capital. Again as reflected in the topic, employee engagement is a very important means of achieving performance. It is therefore a step in the right direction that an index such as the employee engagement index be used in measuring performance. Once this balance is done, the implication is that there will be the avenue to assess each employee as a singular stakeholder for growth and development for the organ isation. The index could thus be considered effective because it offers individualised assessment on employee performance. Barret (2012) puts forth an argument that sharply disagrees with the notion elucidated by Siddahanta and Roy (2010), which puts much emphasis on short term turnover profitability and productivity as the best way to judge the effectiveness of the employee engagement model. In his opinion, employee engagement should be seen as a medium term or a long term strategic change plan rather than a short term one. To this end, the author strongly hold the view that there are many companies who have failed to realize the essence and individual talents of their employees because they dismiss them after one or two years of engagement with no massive returns on the financial books. Contrary to such an attitude, the writer posits that the whole system of organizational change the leads to fatter turnovers grinds slower and so Siddahanta and Roy (2010) cannot be right in their judgment of the output of employee engagement as short term turnover profitability. On their parts, Stringer (2007) and Ulrich (2004) refuse to welcome the debates of the first two writers whether the debate is taken from a short term basis or from a long term basis. Together, the two new writers hold the idea that as much as employee engagement index could be an excellent way to measure performance it is totally out of place to make financial turnover the major focus of the resulting index. In the