ITES sector

Journal Pre-proof

Employee engagement: A study of survivors in Indian IT/ITES sector Dr. Binita Tiwari , Dr. Usha Lenka PII: DOI: Reference:

S0970-3896(17)30222-7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iimb.2019.10.003 IIMB 356

To appear in:

IIMB Management Review

Received date: Revised date: Accepted date:

10 May 2017 31 August 2018 10 October 2019

Please cite this article as: Dr. Binita Tiwari , Dr. Usha Lenka , Employee engagement: A study of survivors in Indian IT/ITES sector, IIMB Management Review (2019), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iimb.2019.10.003

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. © 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Indian Institute of Management Bangalore. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Employee engagement: A study of survivors in Indian IT/ITES sector Dr. Binita Tiwaria* and Dr Usha Lenkab a b

Assistant Professor, School of Management, NIT Rourkela, India

Associate Professor, Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, India *Email: [email protected]

Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to develop a conceptual framework of employee engagement and employer branding of downsized organizations. It examines the association of certain enablers (resonant leadership, internal corporate communication, knowledge sharing, continuous learning, intrapreneurship, and perceived communication satisfaction) with employee engagement. Further, it investigates the association of employee engagement with employer branding. Design/methodology/approach – A sample of 220 middle managers of IT/ITES companies from select states of India were empirically tested to examine the proposed relationships. These managers are from the MNCs that have downsized since 2008-09 economic recession. The hypothesized relationship was tested using Structural Equation Modelling with AMOS 21 software package. Findings – Results indicate that internal corporate communication, knowledge sharing, continuous learning, intrapreneurship, and perceived communication satisfaction were positively associated with employee engagement. Employee engagement is also positively associated with employer branding. However, resonant leadership style is negatively associated with employee engagement. Implications –This study makes a unique contribution to the literature of survivor syndrome by providing a theoretical framework of employee engagement in downsized firms, and subsequently rebuilding organizations as a strong employer brand. This study further establishes reliability and validity of the variables used in the conceptual framework. This study would guide future managers to decide an alternative measure to downsizing. Future scope –A longitudinal research can be carried out to check cause and effect relationships among the variables. Large samples can be used to generalize the findings in Indian IT/ITES sector. A comparative study can be done between public and private organizations. Keywords– downsizing, survivor, employee engagement, employer branding, learning

Introduction Firms across globe are sensitive to competitive challenges of demanding customers, technological innovation, economic slowdown that debilitates their overall performance. Organizational restructuring in the form of downsizing, workforce reduction, and delayering are immediate crisis response strategies (Cameron, 1994). Although, downsizing is a cost reduction measure, but, it has detrimental impact on firm causing: survivor syndrome, employee disengagement, and employer branding (Sahdev, Vinnicombe & Tyson, 1999). Survivor’s syndrome reduces morale, trust, and job security among employees. The insecurity develops for not being able to meet expected performance standards in redesigned organizational structure. Demotivation, lack of faith with supervisors and low commitment impedes survivors overall performance (Devine, Reay, Stainton, & Collins‐Nakai, 2003). They perceive injustice in performance appraisal, reward allocation, learning opportunities, career growth, and communication. The felt injustice increases disengagement, absenteeism and attrition (Biswas & Bhatnagar, 2013). An organization can revive from tremors of downsizing, only when surviving employees are engaged. Therefore, talent development and engagement of employees is a matter of utmost importance for firms experiencing downsizing. The more the employees are engaged, the more likely they say positive about their organizations, thereby building a strong employer brand (Hughes & Rog, 2008). This helps organizations to attract prospective candidates and view itself as an “employer of choice” that help to internalize company’s core values, policies, and practices. However, low engagement of employees leads to poor word-of-mouth, ultimately affecting the brand image. The probability of attracting prospective candidates and retaining potential employees will decrease as the percentage of employees leaving the organization goes up. Gradually, such companies will create a negative cycle of disengagement rather than virtuous cycle of engagement (Macey et. al., 2009). Thus, a strong and positive employer brand retains current and potential employees, actively apprise them about company’s employee value proposition (Dell and Hickey, 2002). With this objective, the paper discusses: literature review of survivor syndrome in the first section, subsequently develops hypotheses to examine impact of psychological support provided by resonant leaders, corporate communication, knowledge sharing, continuous learning, intrapreneurship, and perceived communication satisfaction on employee engagement. Third

section analyses role of an engaged employee in developing employer branding, followed by research methodology, results, discussion, and implications of study. Literature review Survivor syndrome Survivor syndrome is a sequel of behavioural, emotional, and psychological reactions experienced by employees, following involuntary workforce reductions (Datta, Guthrie, Basuil & Pandey, 2010). Negative emotions of anger, anxiety, grief, conflict, depression, low morale, and trust results in low self-esteem. Employees are enveloped with a host of negative psychological and behavioural reactions having detrimental impact on organizational performance and productivity. Feelings of injustice and grief on the loss of their colleagues decline their commitment and engagement in organizational activities. The feeling of betrayal and breach of psychological contract in the aftermath of crisis are reasons enough for their disengagement and extreme negativity. Owing to short-term profit orientation and lack of strategic direction, revised goals and expected performance standards are not clearly communicated aiding to the woes of survivors. They feel disconnected from their work roles coupled with increased absenteeism and intention to quit (Guchait, Cho & Meurs, 2015). Thus firms need to diagnose reasons of survivor syndrome and adopt interventions to engage surviving talent. Therefore, a comprehensive discussion of various models of survivor syndrome is required to identify organizational and individual level variables that can help in reviving employees’ attitude and behaviour. Models of survivor syndrome (1990 till 2015) Survivor syndrome arises due to perceived negative feelings and attitudes of employees about organizational actions. Lack of job security, career development opportunities, breach of psychological contract declines physical and mental health, increases stress, anxiety, and social isolation among survivors. Justice-based model emphasized on developing positive attitude of survivors towards downsizing process (Brockner & Greenberg, 1990). Attitudinal change of employees is possible by identifying organizational priorities and converting them into clear

objectives, and effectively communicating them to the employees. Communication plays an important role to change survivors’ perception of organization as fair and transparent. However, the behavioural responses of employees in the aftermath of downsizing have been further elucidated by Noer (1993). He discussed a four step process to help survivors. First step is to provide space and time to employees to control negative emotions. Next step, is to empathize with them and revive their confidence. Third step is to provide psychosocial support through mentoring, counselling, dialogue and enquiry and autonomy to gain control over their work. Additional competencies are transferred through training and development to equip them for additional roles. The sequel of interventions helps in regaining self-confidence of employees. Therefore, survivor syndrome can be tackled with collective effort of management leaders, employees, colleagues, and the organization (Noer, 1993). Employees overall perception about downsizing changes, when a series of counselling sessions are conducted to discuss management decisions for the growth and development of survivors. Realistic downsizing preview model suggests that counselling and mentoring is a proactive measure to prevent survivor’s syndrome (Appelbaum & Donia, 2000). Conclusively, a new employment contract between survivors and organization is established through top management support, internal corporate communication mechanism, career and developmental opportunities, and overall supportive organizational climate (Baruch & Hind 2000; Beylerian & Kleiner, 2003). Despite the practitioners’ viewpoints on survivor syndrome and coping strategies, there exists lack of empirical investigation and strategies to develop survivors as talent (Gandolfi, 2006). Most of the studies on survivors’ syndrome have discussed perception of survivors of downsized firms. The perceptions are analyzed by practitioners and researchers. However, a substantial research on developing worth of survivors for organizational performance is a major gap in the literature. Till date literature has emphasized on consequences of survivors syndrome. But, how to develop a sustainable competitive organization by developing survivors as talent through organizational actions, counselling, training and development has remained unexplored. Developing survivors as potential a talent is a cost effective strategy for organizations (Deloitte, 2013). Talent development is a precondition of employee engagement, which remains still unexplored territory in academic literature. Employee engagement is an antithesis of job burnout (Harter, Schmidt & Hayes, 2002). Engagement is a psychological state of an employee that emanates from social exchange in the

workplace and results in higher organizational performance. An employee exhibits higher performance, when he finds meaningfulness in the job, corporate culture and policies; safety in career, status, and physical, emotional, and psychological empowerment (Kahn, 1990). Studies discussed above widely throw light on the contribution of certain variables to increase employee engagement. These variables are: leadership, organizational communication, continuous learning, organizational justice, career development, training, rewards and recognition, knowledge sharing, trust, and organizational commitment. The impact of these variables to improve performance has been discussed at peripheral level. Drawing inference from these studies, certain enablers (resonant leadership, internal corporate communication, knowledge sharing, continuous learning, intrapreneurship, and perceived communication satisfaction) have been identified to develop a conceptual framework of employee engagement of survivors in downsized firms. A detailed discussion of the conceptual framework of employee engagement of survivors has been systematically discussed in subsequent hypotheses. Hypothesis development Resonant leadership and employee engagement As presence of a leader in the workplace causes state engagement of an employee. Therefore, role of an emotionally intelligent leader is crucial in developing morale of survivors of downsized firms. Trait and behavioural theories of leadership discuss about adaptability of leaders to contingent situations. However, contemporary leadership theories: charismatic, transactional, and transformational discuss about the influence process, i.e. mechanism of influence. Charismatic leaders inspire employees through their charisma. Transactional leaders motivate subordinates through exchange of rewards/punishment. Transformational leaders inspire employees for higher performance through individualized consideration, intellectual stimulation, idealized influence, and inspirational motivation (Bass, Avolio, Jung, & Berson, 2003). Conclusively, these leaders influence subordinates through social exchange process and their prime concern is goal attainment. However, downsized firms face extremely different contingent situation. Survivors experience job insecurity, anxiety, and skill obsolescence. Persuading survivors them for higher performance requires vigour and positive relational energy. In such a situation, an emotionally intelligent resonant leader, who can infuse positive energy is

suitable. They raise self-confidence and esteem of subordinates by articulating meaningful vision, compassion, and overall positive mood (Boyatzis, Rochford & Taylor, 2015). Goleman, Boyatzis & McKee’s (2002) explored the concept of emotionally intelligent resonant leaders. These leaders are empathetic, manage self/others emotions, and motivate subordinates to achieve organizational goals. They propagate a compelling vision, build positive relationships to foster a healthy, vibrant work environment and engage employees toward a common goal (Wong et al., 2013).They provide employees with learning opportunities to improve their overall performance. Challenging task with defined roadmap or vision raises employees’ confidence and commitment towards goal attainment. Congruence of organizational goals with their personal development, meaningful task, access to information, resources, and leadership support enhances their level of engagement (Buse & Bilimoria, 2015). Compassion is observing, feeling, and responding to others’ needs (Dutton, Worline, Frost & Lilius, 2006). Observing others grief and experiences helps in internalizing their problems. Theory of emotional contagion connotes that emotions are contagious and build up quickly among the work group (Hatfield, Cacippo & Rapson, 1994). Emotional contagion theory is further reinforced by Broaden-and-build theory which states that employees with positive mindset recover from setbacks, and contribute meaningfully to the work with creative ideas (Fredrickson, 1998). Trust and cooperation of resonant leaders, their interaction and cordial relationships with survivors enhances enthusiasm and commitment (Lenka & Tiwari, 2016). Therefore, inspiring and challenging vision, empathetic and compassionate attitude of leader, and overall positive mood enhances level of engagement of survivors. They feel valuable and garner their commitment and engagement towards organization’s vision. Therefore, we propose H1: Resonant leadership is positively associated with employee engagement. Internal corporate communication and employee engagement Internal corporate communication plays a vital role in building a transparent relationship between management and employees (Dolphin, 2005). It is a two-way communication between managers and internal stakeholders about organizational mission and objectives (Welch & Jackson, 2007). These employees are the team, project, line, and corporate managers with assigned roles and responsibilities. Team peer communication is discussions related to team task. Project related information and issues are discussed in project peer communication. Day-to-day

discussions about managerial roles is called line manager communication. Stakeholder theory states that clear and consistent corporate information is conveyed to employees through communication channels (Freeman & McVea, 2001). These messages are information specific to firms’ objectives, job roles, personnel policies, and career planning and developmental opportunities that help employees disburse their roles and responsibilities. Clarity and consistency in these information on corporate mission, values, and business challenges guide employees’ decisions and actions as claimed by Medium theory (McLuhan, 1964). It reaffirms employees’ faith in management and helps building interpersonal relationships among employees and promotes interdepartmental reliance or organizational integration. Clear guidelines on job roles and responsibilities, reporting relationships, and authority builds psychological contract. Perceived fairness in communication process reduces employees’ uncertainty, increases level of engagement, and willingness to exert discretionary efforts. But it would be possible only when firms disseminate accurate information through both formal and informal communication channels such as face-to-face conversations, telephone, internet, intranet, and blogs (Al-Ghamdi, Roy & Ahmed, 2007). Media richness theory emphasizes on the importance of selection of appropriate content and channel to disseminate messages (Daft & Lengel, 1984). Therefore, content and channel are prime components of corporate communication which emphasizes on meaningful corporate information, organizational integration, communication climate, and media quality (Downs & Hazen, 1977; Sharma & Kamalanabhan, 2012). Meaningful corporate messages or content is delivered to employees for effective communication. Corporate messages can be negative/positive, fact/opinions, controversial/relevant to the receiver. Business priorities are placed through suitable channels like: meetings, workshops, e-mail, notices, and discussion forums to avoid distortion of messages and maintain consistency (Zmud, 1978). Clear messages delivered through right channels increases message acceptability and involvement of employees. It increases employees’ awareness on changing business priorities, probable threats and opportunities (Welch, 2011). Frequent interaction and information sharing increases their psychological involvement in job as well as organization (Ruck & Trainor, 2012). This drives a sense of belongingness in employees causing commitment and engagement towards organizations. Therefore, we propose H2: Internal corporate communication is positively associated with employee engagement.

Knowledge sharing and employee engagement Knowledge is considered as the most valuable assets for firms in 21st century (Civi, 2000). Knowledge is an understanding acquired through education, experience, and learning (Nonaka, Takeuchi & Umemoto, 1996). Organizational knowledge has tacit-explicit dichotomy (Nonaka, 1994). Tacit knowledge is subjective and highly personalized which shapes employees’ action and cognition. Explicit knowledge, on the other hand is an objective form of knowledge, available in the form of documented rules, operating procedures, and organizational routines. At the time of economic recession firms capitalize on in-house talent, as personalized knowledge of employees is highly difficult to imitate. Unlike explicit knowledge, tacit knowledge is difficult to share. Therefore organization adopt several approaches to harness tacit knowledge by promoting knowledge sharing practices of collaboration, teamwork, training and development to change attitude and behaviour of employees. Intentions to share personalized knowledge cannot be triggered through extrinsic/intrinsic rewards: incentives, position and status, as rewards and recognition to some extent can only reduce dissatisfaction of employees. Tacit knowledge can be shared by developing social networks with the help of a knowledge catalysts, and talent management processes of coaching, mentoring, training, workshops to transform attitudes and behaviours of employees Knowledge sharing intention, behaviour, and the process are considered to be the prime components of knowledge sharing, as it causes learning and development. Knowledge sharing is an exchange of know-how, ideas, experiences, and expertise between employees, team members, databases, and repositories (Bock, Zmud, Kim & Lee, 2005; Van den Hooff & De Ridder, 2004). Technology alone cannot facilitate knowledge sharing. Knowledge can be created and shared in the organization through the process of socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization as explained in SECI model (Nonaka et al., 1996). Socialization (tacit to tacit) is sharing tacit knowledge through practice, guidance, and face-to-face communication. Human knowledge is codified into written documents, manuals, procedures, and policies in externalization (tacit to explicit). Sharing of objective knowledge both inside and outside the organization is called combination (explicit to explicit). Internalization (explicit to tacit) is a process when, objective form of knowledge is understood, learned, and further used by employees. A firm can promote a climate of knowledge sharing by

adopting practices of internal transfer, job rotation, cross skilling to develop their knowledge network (Lin, 2007). Mentoring promotes transfer of critical job knowledge from experts to protégés and broadens social capital through mentors’ social network. Supportive leadership, technology, and infrastructure provide platform for discussion (Yi, 2009). Regular meetings of experts and developers to capture knowledge through techniques of brainstorming, concept mapping, and nominal group technique. They appreciate employees’ innovative ideas, suggestions, and provide constructive feedback to enhance their self-esteem (Schepers &Van den Berg, 2007). Employees share experiences and know-how through communities of practices which will guide other employees from making mistakes. Meetings, presentations, and discussions facilitate knowledge sharing behaviour (Lin, 2007). Employees contribute their ideas and thoughts to company databases in the form of journals, magazines, and newsletters. Online chats, informal discussions, and e-mail facilitate further discussion (Yi, 2009). Social interactions, cordial relationships, and reliance on each other’s competence develops a positive attitude of employees towards knowledge sharing as claimed by theory of reasoned action (TRA) (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). Employees exhibit positive work behaviour of engagement and commitment. Thus, we propose the hypothesis that H3: Knowledge sharing is positively associated with employee engagement. Continuous learning and employee engagement Continuous learning helps employees learn new skills (London & Smither, 1999). Employees with an inner urge for development learn faster with the support of top management. In a psychologically safe environment, employees exchange knowledge and insights as claimed by social learning theory (Bandura & Walters, 1963). As a result, they constructively contribute their ideas without fear of reprimand. Therefore, top management support, risk tolerance, and psychological safety are considered to be the key dimensions for continuous learning. A supportive and psychologically safe work environment creates ground for open discussion and interpersonal relationship. Psychological safety is provided through formal and informal organizational practices and procedures that help employees to discuss task related problems, autonomy to take risks and ask colleague’s assistance (Baer & Frese, 2003; Edmondson, 1999). Employees working in a safe and supportive environment openly express their opinions, experiment new ideas, make trivial errors without fear of repercussion, learn and acquire new

competencies from seniors. This promotes continuous learning of employees as they acquire knowledge, skills, and abilities throughout their career (Oldham & Cummings, 1996). Stretched goals, training workshops, conferences, and seminars further advance employees’ knowledge (Noe & Wilk, 1993; Tannenbaum, 1977). Training workshops generates awareness about competitiveness in the industry and change attitude and behaviour towards knowledge sharing, reduce stress, and prepare employees to adapt to changing organizational needs. Employees feel contented when an organization provides training opportunities to decide priorities and learn from past mistakes as claimed by Existence, Relatedness, and Growth theory (ERG) (Alderfer, 1972). Supervisors give constructive feedback on performance, clarify assignments, provide resources, financial support, and facilitate risk taking to ensure employees learn and develop throughout their tenure (Eddy, Tannenbaum, Lorenzet & Smith-Jentsch, 2005). They discuss organizational challenges and suggest acquiring new competencies to be prepared for future work roles. Access to resources, developmental opportunities, rewards and recognition, and autonomy develops a sense of volition among employees. This builds their confidence, enriches learning capability, thus leading to high employee engagement. Thus, we propose the hypothesis that H4: Continuous learning is positively associated with employee engagement. Intrapreneurship and employee engagement Intrapreneurship is the process of promoting innovation and risk taking among employees (Pinchot & Pellman, 1999). It is also termed as corporate entrepreneurship or corporate venturing (Schollhammer, 1982). Employees are likely to develop innovative ideas by exploiting opportunities to create economic value for the organizations. These corporate intrapreneurs exhibit characteristics of innovation, risk taking, self-renewal, and proactiveness (Antoncic & Hisrich, 2001; Sayeed & Gazdar, 2003). Organizations promote corporate intrapreneurship to: (a) diversify business units; (b) develop new business ventures; (c) utilize untapped talent; and (d) retain talent within an organization (Schaper & Volery, 2007). In order to improve intrapreneurship, organizations continuously renew their business strategies, increase coordination among departments, and provide adequate resources for experimenting high-risk projects. Opportunities to explore and experiment new ideas breeds intrapreneurial culture (Pinchot & Pellman, 1999). Organizations apprise employees about their strategic business goals,

customer desires, and competitive threats. They align business goals with employees’ personal goals and provide a suitable work environment to build their capabilities as intrapreneurs (Ramaswamy, 2009). Employees feel free to use their intrapreneurial skills, develop creative ideas to improve organizational performance (Agca, Topal & Kaya, 2012). They take initiatives to identify business needs and provide innovative solutions to resolve market-driven problems. Autonomy, access to resources, and support from employers generates a feeling of empowerment. Flexibility across departments increases social interaction, knowledge sharing, and enhances self-efficacy of employees. They face challenging task with confidence. They are proactive to take initiatives, suggest significant changes in products and services, and adopt operating technologies to maintain a competitive edge. Vroom’s expectancy theory supports this proposition that higher the efforts exerted by employees, higher would be their confidence level to perform task. Their performance would be enhanced when their intrapreneurial behaviour is rewarded and recognized by organization (Vroom, 1964). Rewards, resources, and social support develop a sense of ownership among employees. They exert their time, effort, and energy to participate in high-risk projects. Their passion and enthusiasm inspires others to actively involve and suggest creative solutions. This drives collaboration, innovation, and level of emotional and psychological attachment towards organization (Stander & Rothmann, 2010). Thus, intrapreneurial efforts within an organization build new pathways for employees to engage them towards their job and organization. Thus, we propose the hypothesis that H5: Intrapreneurship is positively associated with employee engagement. Perceived communication satisfaction and employee engagement Perceived communication satisfaction is the overall satisfaction of an employee with the type of communication made with supervisors, subordinates, co-workers, and personal feedback processed (DeConinck, Johnson, Busbin & Lockwood, 2008). Supervisory communication is information from supervisors to employees about changing business strategies, policies, employee benefits, and organizational goals (Miles, Patrick & King, 1996). Supervisors assess employees’ needs and expectations, actively solicit their suggestions to improve organizational performance (Adelman, 2012). Candid discussions on organizational issues, management

decisions, and routine tasks help in developing a sense of trust among employees. Relevant information provided by supervisors makes day to day activities more meaningful and enhances employees’ commitment and engagement. Subordinate communication is transmission of information from subordinates to top management on routine organizational messages like daily work schedules, progress report, organization’s policies, procedures, and practices (Armstrong & Taylor, 2014). Employees provide suggestions through surveys, discussions, or focus group interviews to bring transparency in work culture, where honest opinion on intra/interdepartmental issues and grievances are conveyed to the top management (Adelman, 2012). Supervisors ensure that employees’ voices are heard and effective dialogue is initiated to clarify work roles and performance expectations. Employees set targets, develop competencies aligned with business objectives (Bhatnagar, 2008). Similarly, co-worker communication is accurate and free-flowing informal interaction among colleagues. Employees working within and outside departments, maintain coordination with each other to solve problems, share information across work groups, and effectively coordinate between departments. Personal feedback is knowledge about employees’ own performance, which is important to know gaps in learning. An efficient feedback system helps employees to know their learning deficiencies, which may arise due to unclear goals and training opportunities (Deci & Ryan, 1987). If employees are given personal feedback to improve their competencies, it boosts their morale and increases commitment and psychological involvement. Feedback by management helps in continuous improvement of their career growth. Thus, perceived satisfaction with supervisors, subordinates, and co-workers motivates employees to engage their head and heart for higher organizational performance. Engaged employees deliver an exemplary service to promote organizational growth. Thus, we propose the hypothesis that H6: Perceived communication satisfaction is positively associated with employee engagement Employee engagement and employer branding Employee engagement is an emotional and intellectual bond of employees with their work and organization (Gibbons, 2006). An engaged employee invests physical, emotional, cognitive, and behavioural energies to accomplish firms’ objectives (Kahn, 1990; Lockwood, 2007; Shuck & Wollard, 2010). Physical engagement is attained, when an employee is willing to exert extra efforts to achieve organizational goals. Cognitive engagement is an employee’s psychological

involvement and dedication in performing assigned roles. Emotional engagement is pride and enthusiasm to work for employers. Behavioural engagement is extra role behaviour of employees in performing tasks. People with positive attitude and conscientiousness are involved in their work and adapt themselves to business demands as claimed by Folk theory (Macey & Schneider, 2008). Thus, employees with positive attitude quickly adapt to changes in business environment showing behavioural engagement. Psychological support of management, freedom to express thoughts, and meaningful work, raises employees’ self-efficacy and sense of association with the organization (Kahn, 1990). Selfconcordance theory also supports that employees willingly contribute their time and effort when their work roles are consistent with their personal goals (Sheldon & Elliot, 1999). Their ability to express opinions without fear escalates their trust with organization. In lieu of the espoused trust, employees perform challenging assignments as expected, and build interpersonal relations with supervisors to bring desired outcomes. Clarity of tasks, autonomy, resource availability, and opportunities for development further reinforce their psychological contract (Saks, 2006). Engaged employees are productive, highly motivated, provide valuable inputs and exhibit exemplary performances. They are willing to invest discretionary efforts, feel enthusiastic about their work, and are accountable for their own performances (Shuck & Wollard, 2010). They feel proud, speak positive about their organization, and act as brand ambassadors, thus promoting organization as an employer brand (Berthon, Ewing & Hah, 2005). An employer brand provides employees’ friendly policies and practices that meet their career aspirations as well as provide an opportunity for lifelong learning (Ambler & Barrow, 1996). This is only possible, when an organization adopts ethical practices, has certain core values that emphasizes on meaningful relationship in the workplace to develop employee potential. Such workplaces not only care for their employees’ career growth, but also have a focus on highest level of customer satisfaction. In order to develop their core competency through development of in-house talent, these organizations provide functional, economic, and psychological benefits to their employees to showcase as an employer brand (Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004). Functional benefits are job security, training and development, and career-enhancing opportunities. Economic benefits are fair compensation, psychological benefits are conducive workplace and provision for learning and growth.

Theory of social exchange states that on receiving intrinsic/extrinsic rewards, employees have a sense of obligation to repay the organization with loyalty and commitment (Blau, 1964). Social identity theory also claims that employees identify themselves with the organization because of the organizational justice practiced (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). They internalize firms’ brand values and feel passionate, to be brand ambassadors to disseminate a positive message of various stakeholders (Punjaisri, Wilson & Evanschitzky, 2009). These messages are signals enough to retain potential employees and attract prospective employees (Celani & Singh, 2011). Engaged employees are more likely to develop positive relationships with the internal/external stakeholders. They act as brand representatives for the firms and deliver promises of the employer brand. The greater the positive message about firm, better would be firms’ image. Thus, we propose the hypothesis that H7: Employee engagement is positively associated with employer branding. Based on all the above hypothesized relationships, a conceptual framework of employee engagement and employer branding of downsized organizations has been formulated (Figure. 1). Insert Figure 1 about here Methodology Sample A series of meetings were conducted with middle managers of IT/ITES companies from select states of India. Selection of states (Delhi and National Capital region, Pune, Mumbai, Bangalore, Hyderabad, Chennai, Bhubaneswar, Kolkata) were made on the basis of their recognition as IT hubs of India. These IT/ITES companies are multinationals: IBM, Infosys, TCS, Yahoo, Cognizant, Samsung and the like, which have undergone downsizing in the form of pink slips, job relocation, and firing of employees on the basis of merit/seniority/performance. The phenomenon of downsizing has started in 2008-09 economic recession and still continues. 300 managers were administered questionnaire on a random basis from these companies. Survey was carried out over a period of 3 months from October 2015 to December 2015. The managers whose responses were collected have experienced effect of downsizing in the form of powerless, social alienation, poor interaction with higher management, which increased fear, anxiety, and uncertainty among them as well as the employees in lower level of management. To help them

revive from survivor syndrome, certain management practices have been adopted by the firms to develop in-house talent as a strategic option for sustainability. In order to ensure confidentiality of survey responses, a cover letter explaining the purpose of the study was attached with each questionnaire. Out of 300 questionnaire administered, only 220 responses were finally procured with a response rate of 73.3%. Measures Resonant leadership scale is developed with the help of literature (Boyatzis &McKee, 2005; Boyatzis et al., 2015; Goleman et al., 2002). Resonant leadership is measured with three variables: vision, compassion, and overall positive mood, resulting in a 21 item scale. Internal corporate communication scale consists of four dimensions: organization integration, corporate information, media quality, and communication climate. A self-designed questionnaire consisting of 21 items have been developed with the help of literature (Sharma & Kamalanabhan, 2012; Welch & Jackson, 2007). Knowledge sharing consists of three variables: knowledge sharing intention, knowledge sharing behaviour, and knowledge sharing process. A self-designed questionnaire consisting of 11 items has been developed with the help of literature (Bock et al., 2005; Lin, 2007; Van den Hooff & Ridder, 2004). Continuous learning consists of three variables: top management support, risk tolerance, and psychological safety. A self-designed questionnaire consisting of 20 items has been developed (Edmondson, 1999; London & Smither, 1999; Tannenbaum, 1997). Intrapreneurship consists of four variables: innovation, risk-taking, proactiveness, and selfrenewal. A self-designed questionnaire consisting of 13 items has been developed (Antoncic & Hisrich, 2001; Sayeed & Gazdar, 2003). Perceived communication satisfaction consists of four variables: supervisory communication, subordinate communication, co-worker communication, and personal feedback. A self-designed questionnaire consisting of 14 items has been developed (Downs & Hazen, 1977; DeConinck et al., 2008).

Employee engagement consists of four variables: physical, emotional, cognitive, and behavioural. A self-designed questionnaire consisting of 17 items has been developed (Kahn, 1990; Lockwood, 2007; Macey & Schneider, 2008). Employer branding consists of functional, economic, and psychological benefits. It is a selfdesigned questionnaire consisting of 19 items (Ambler & Barrow, 1996; Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004). All measures are given in details in Table 1. All the items have been measured using five point Likert type scale ranging from “1” (strongly disagree) to “5” (strongly agree). To assess the validity of variables, we conducted a Confirmatory Factor Analysis using AMOS 21.0 software package. Measurement model of all variables with their descriptive statistics, composite reliability and results of confirmatory factor analysis are given in Table 1. Items with factor loadings more than or equal to 0.7 are retained finally to have a better construct reliability (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998). Composite reliability (CR) scores values are ≥ 0.6 and average variance extracted (AVE) are ≥ 0.5 showing consistency of measures underlying the theoretical latent construct. Square root of average variance extracted is a measure for discriminant validity and value of which should be more than the correlations of variables measuring the construct as in Table 2 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). All the fit measures of the variables (CFI; GFI; NFI; RMSEA; and χ2/df) indices were in the acceptable range (Bollen, 1989), confirming validity of the measure. The survey questionnaire has also been checked for its content validity by asking subject experts and practioners. Insert Table 1 about here Insert Table 2 about here Results The proposed hypothesized framework showing cause and effect relationship between variables: resonant leadership, internal corporate communication, knowledge sharing, continuous learning, intrapreneurship, perceived communication satisfaction, employee engagement and employer branding has been tested using structural equation modelling method with the help of AMOS 21 software package.

The proposed hypothesized relation (H2, H3, H4, H5, H6, and H7) were significant. However, H1 with a hypothesized direction of resonant leadership to employee engagement has a nonsignificant relationship. Therefore, H1 has been rejected and an improved model has been tested by eliminating the non-significant hypothesized path H1 (Figure 2). The hypothesized direction, standardized path coefficients, and critical ratios of both hypothesized and improved model have been shown in Table 3 and 4. Both the models are depicted in Table 5, which shows improvement in fit measures (Hair et al., 1998). Therefore, improved model has been accepted. Insert Figure 2 about here Insert Table 3 about here Insert Table 4 about here Insert Table 5 about here Discussion The present study has been conducted in IT/ITES multinational companies, with offices in India. The study identifies factors that cause employee engagement in downsized organizations. It also identifies how engaged employees can help in developing organization image as an employer brand. Studies highlight that resonant leadership has a non-significant relationship with employee engagement. However, hypotheses H2, H3, H4, H5, H6, and H7 have been supported in this study. Higher influence of internal corporate communication, knowledge sharing, continuous learning, intrapreneurship, and perceived communication satisfaction have increased employees’ level of engagement. High employee engagement helps in developing an organization as an employer brand. Results of this study have been discussed in the following sections respectively. Resonant leadership and employee engagement Our results show that resonant leadership has a non-significant relationship with employee engagement. Resonant leadership has been measured with variables: vision, compassion, and overall positive mood. Indian IT/ITES organizations follow a well-defined hierarchy, where leaders make the majority of the decisions such as layoffs. Indian corporates have a culture of high power distance with centralization. Leadership style is autocratic, where employees and

leaders follow a hierarchy and abide by firms’ directives, rules, and policies. Leaders are involved with framing action plans for survival of firms in the midst of competition. Empathy and individualized consideration to subordinates takes a backstage. They direct subordinates to work on cutting edge technologies and deliver quality services. They show concern for their employees, but do not go beyond limit to support them, causing dissonance among them. Due to competitive pressure, managers assign time bound tasks. However challenging the tasks may be, focus of managers is meeting timelines. They ignore the discomfort of employees and focus on client satisfaction. The undue pressure created by managers causes distress and hinders creative potential of employees because of routine mature of work. Employees become reluctant in expressing their ideas due to fear of losing job positions. High work pressure and routine nature of task causes frustration and disengagement. Demotivated and disengaged employees show high absenteeism and have tendency to hop jobs, which adversely affect project delivery dates and customer satisfaction (Khatri, Chong, & Budhwar, 2001). Employees need psychosocial and emotional support from their leaders along with their technical expertise and institutional knowledge. However, leaders could not give much attention to personal needs of employees and were more involved in developing strategies to meet customers’ needs. Managers did not show resonant leadership style, but were more autocratic. Thus, the hypothesis was not supported. Internal corporate communication and employee engagement Our results show that internal corporate communication has a significant relationship with employee engagement. The process of communication between strategic managers and internal stakeholders is called internal corporate communication. The purpose of internal corporate communication is to promote awareness among employees about changing business environment and its evolving demands. Meaningful content of corporate messages and appropriate channel for internal communication helps in forming favourable employee’ attitude towards organizational initiatives. Internal corporate communication emphasizes on organizational integration, corporate information, communication climate, and media quality to increase employee engagement. With the changing dynamics of business environment, formal and informal communication are the primary vehicles for information exchange within Indian IT/ITES sector. Clear, consistent, and

credible information about reorganization, layoffs, compensation and benefit plans for employees increases psychological safety and reduces resistance. Transparent information about present/past performance, firms’ policies and practices reduces misunderstandings, conflicts among employees and management. There is coordination among employees and routine activities are carried out without any obstruction. Most of the multinational companies such as 3M, Wipro, and Yahoo have used multiple communication channels to make employees understand, assimilate, and internalize organization’s vision and values. Top management in these firms have also agreed that employees are updated with day to day information to have their involvement in projects. Proactive and timely communication through appropriate channels helps organizations reach larger audiences holding varied positions, knowledge, and interests. Information about corporate news and views, employees and their family members’ achievements/involvement in extracurricular activities, sports, entertainment, current affairs in the form of memos, brochures, notices, and newsletters, 24-7 hotlines, e-mails, and social media creates a sense of belongingness among employees. They feel valued because of recognition and a feeling of connectedness and involvement occurs. A climate of trust among employer-employee is fostered and improves their relationships. Therefore, Indian IT/ITES firms are using internal corporate communication mechanism to promote a culture of open and transparent communication. Employees feel involved with the mainstream workforce as their views are taken into account, and contribute for organizational reconstruction with sincerity and dedication. Internal corporate communication provides an amicable work environment where employees’ level of engagement would thrive. Knowledge sharing and employee engagement Results of the study confirm that knowledge sharing practices helps in improving employee engagement. In a dynamic business environment, competitive advantage of an organization is obtained from tacit knowledge or experience of in-house talent. Large organization store tacit knowledge of employees in objective or explicit form. The explicit knowledge available in organization repositories is called institutionalized knowledge. Institutionalized knowledge is available in the form of written documents, charts, graphs, codes etc. These repositories are

updated regularly on completion of IT projects, transfer or separation of employees from firms. Knowledge sharing practices are widely adopted in organization as latest technology supports knowledge sharing practices. Online databases, communities of practice or discussion forums are widely propagated in the organization to facilitate employees to contribute their ideas and thoughts. E-journals, magazines, newsletters also help them to increase their awareness and change attitude and behaviour towards knowledge sharing practices. Their overall exposure helps them to stay abreast with market trends, industry updates, and management initiatives. Many company intranets also provide interactive platform for employees to share their views on company programs. Social interactions, web based tools, and personal chats with colleagues help employees solve work-related problems. This allows employees to seek and share information with

co-workers.

Employees

are

encouraged

to

share

knowledge

by

giving

rewards/incentives/recognition for addition of new knowledge to existing database. . Developing a strong information network through exclusive use of company’s databases and formal/informal forum of employees’ association promotes satisfaction of employees. They feel motivated that their ideas are highly valued and show more interest to share knowledge. Though organizations provides world class infrastructure and support to share knowledge, major bottleneck is to create employees’ favourable attitude and behaviour. Favourable attitude and behaviour towards knowledge sharing have been created by organizational practices, performance appraisal system, and training and development programs. Companies like HCL, Infosys, Wipro, Tech Mahindra, and others are creating awareness among employees by holding regular meetings to encourage communication, collaboration, and sharing of insights, by giving continuous feedback. Continuous Learning and employee engagement Continuous learning is possible only when, employees perceive organization to be psychologically safe, and have support from top management. Psychological support increases risk tolerance ability of employees. Training programmes, conferences, seminars, or workshops on current themes are organized throughout the year to update their knowledge. On-the-job training and skill development courses acquaint employees with fundamental knowledge to perform tasks. The lifelong learning opportunity empowers employees with knowledge and

information to experiment newer ways of conducting business practices to meet cut-throat competition. Majority of IT/ITES companies surveyed have flexi time schedules, and deploy employees in challenging projects. Multinational companies provide a platform to employees to express their creativity, empowers them to take initiatives, and organize events without any procedural rigmarole. Learning is initiated in the organizations by top management as they ignore trivial mistakes during idea generation and implementation. A supportive work environment which grooms employee talent is perceived to be fair. This generates a climate of trust where employees openly express their opinions and take challenging assignments. Organizations in turn recognize strengths, accomplishments, and overall development of the employees. Owing to which, employees feel motivated, develop a sense of belongingness, and involve more in learning activities. Through an on-going learning strategy, organizations facilitate employees to adapt

to

dynamic

business

environment.

They

develop

competence

through

synchronous/asynchronous learning, knowledge sharing, and experiential learning methods. Their overall perception about management builds confidence and a sense of belongingness. Therefore, the present study has found a strong relationship between continuous learning and employee engagement. Intrapreneurship and employee engagement Intrapreneurship is measured by innovation, risk taking, proactiveness, and self-renewal ability of an organization. Indian multinationals are encouraging intrapreneurial culture to promote innovation. Deloitte, Accenture, Barclays and others have initiated formal programs: conferences, webinars, and career coaches to encourage employees to develop new ideas to work on personal projects. They have adopted audio visual aids and action learning techniques, alongwith traditional training methods. Besides this, there is exponential growth of infrastructure investment for innovation and risk taking. These organizations are encouraging employees to take ownership of their work. Mentorship, financial and infrastructure support are provided to them to initiate the novice idea and execute it to achieve organization’s vision. Organizations are providing scope to employees for preparation, incubation, illumination, and verification of their ideas. Incubation is unconscious combination of thoughts which were developed by employees

during their conscious working hours. Emotions and positive mood further helps in developing abstract idea formed in unconscious state of mind. The new ideas generated by employees is further shaped by positive emotions in the workplace that enhances memory and learning processes of individuals. Google, Apple, 3M, Sony, and Intel motivates employees to think out of the box and ignores mistakes and failures as opportunities to learn. This is a psychological empowerment of employees to take calculated risks in their tasks. Employees regularly interact to build a network of relationships with like-minded people. Organizations rewards and recognizes their contribution. Being valued and appreciated by employers generates a sense of belongingness towards their organization. Job roles are perceived to be meaningful and employees feel contented and continue to add value to the organization. This results in high engagement and low attrition rates of employees. Thus, intrapreneurship comes out to be a win-win strategy to advance both the needs of employees and success of the organization. Intrapreneurial efforts within an organization engage heads and hearts of potential employees and also attract prospective employees into the organization. Therefore, the variable intrapreneurship has been found to have a significant relationship with employee engagement. Perceived communication satisfaction and employee engagement Employees were satisfied with supervisor, co-worker, and subordinate communication, and also performance feedback given by them. Open and honest communication between supervisors and subordinates increases credibility of management. Supervisors listen to employees, understand their situations, and make proper decisions. They seek employees’ opinions about key issues, share company’s results and progress on business initiatives. Employees meet supervisors’ expectations, choose their priorities carefully, and are more productive. Most of the organizations facilitate upward communication of subordinates to their supervisors through survey feedback, suggestion boxes, and hotlines. Informal discussions help them provide suggestions without fear from top management. Supervisors are attentive and co-operative, which makes employees enthusiastic about their work, and they are more connected with company’s vision.

Google, Accenture, Apple, Convergys, Sopra and others, offers transparent information across the board, encouraging employees to contribute beyond their defined jobs. They provide quality time to their co-workers to perform tasks. This builds trust, improve engagement, and create an amicable atmosphere where emotions, ideas, and ambitions can be shared freely. Cordial relations and support of co-workers make them feel satisfied and less inclined to quit the organization. Furthermore, feedback enhances performance of an employee (Pincus, 1986). Supervisors provide information about employees’ performance through performance appraisal and reviews. Appreciation from supervisors motivates their future performance. Open communication between employer and employee facilitate employers to have a better understanding about employee’s needs and problems and foster amicable workplace relationships. Therefore, perceived communication satisfaction of employees with supervisor, subordinate, and co-worker communication alongwith proper feedback enhances commitment and engagement. Employee engagement and employer branding Indian IT/ITES companies are facing a competition from rival firms. To keep themselves in the ambit of competition, they continuously update knowledge of employees in strategic positions. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation by supervisors and top management enhances their selfefficacy. They realize their worth and become keen to update their knowledge on new technologies and latest software. Economic benefits in terms of available resources, compensation, and fringe benefits satisfies them. Opportunities for promotion, career growth, innovation, risk and initiative taking provides psychological satisfaction. Functional, economic, and psychological benefits enhances employees’ level of engagement. The more employees are engaged and motivated, better would be business results, reduced absenteeism, and accident rates. By providing creative opportunities, adequate resources, rewards for discretionary efforts, and a supportive environment, employees invest more time and energy to accomplish the tasks. When there is a congruence between firms’ internal and external image, employees are capable to ‘‘live the brand’’ and feel proud and passionate about working in such firms (Srivastava & Bhatnagar, 2008). The positive attitude about firms’ image increases an employee’ social identification with the firm. They feel connected to the vision, mission, and core values of the organization and deliver brand promises to both internal/external customers. Therefore, Indian

multinational companies: Infosys, Accenture, Ericsson, HCL, and Tata consulting group reinforces employees to internalize firms’ values and develop positive relationship with stakeholders. They become brand ambassadors for their organizations. Employer branding helps in rebuilding corporate image after downsizing. A positive employer image further helps in retaining existing employees and attracting prospective talent. Therefore, a significant relationship between employee engagement and employer branding was found in the present study. Conclusion Workforce downsizing reduces survivors’ morale. To revive their confidence and self-efficacy, certain talent development strategies have been adopted. These strategies are resonant leadership, internal corporate communication, knowledge sharing, continuous learning, intrapreneurship, and perceived communication satisfaction. Clear and consistent messages about changing business priorities through appropriate channel, increases trust of employees with management. Coordination and support across departments helps in transforming attitude and behaviour of employees. They adapt to new business environment, perform challenging tasks with confidence, and explore innovative ideas. Counselling, support, and recognition are mechanism to boost employee morale. Efficient communication with supervisors, subordinates, and co-workers helps in collective problem solving, sharing information and ideas, and providing feedback to improve performance. Opportunities to take risks, ignoring mistakes, flexible goals, and encouraging new ideas inflates self confidence and trust of employees and reduces fear and anxiety. These interventions helps in developing a positive attitude of employees towards organizational practices and increases their whole hearted involvement. Overall, these initiatives revive organizations’ financial status and showcases it as an employer of choice. Implications for Theory and Practice This study contributes to the literature of survivor syndrome by providing a theoretical framework of employee engagement in downsized firms. This framework emphasizes on the significant roles of communication policies, knowledge sharing, and learning in rebuilding the psychological contract of employees. It highlights the importance of trust and psychological empowerment of survivors of downsized organizations. Attitudinal change of survivors’ through

various talent development initiatives of organization transform intention and behaviour of employees confirming the theory of reasoned action (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980). This study has developed and validated several antecedents of employee engagement from the perspectives of downsized organizations otherwise called talent development and engagement of survivors of downsized organizations. This framework would be useful frame of reference for organizations facing similar challenges. Furthermore, the theoretical framework provides guidance to managers to decide an alternative measure to downsizing like discontinuing few product lines, service offerings, and support functions on a temporary basis. Issues regarding internal communication in the organization must be explicitly addressed. Fair and transparent policies and legal implementation of procedures can earn employees’ trust. Creating a safe and supportive environment is particularly important when an employee’ experiences low confidence due to fear of unknown factors. Firms need to resuscitate employees’ confidence and self-efficacy through psychosocial support mechanisms like emotionally intelligent leader, capacity building measures and continuous learning opportunities. They should prepare scheduled reviews to address employees’ needs and provide constructive feedback to evoke positive responses. Provisions for adequate pay, fringe benefits, job security, and healthy working conditions can further enhance morale and motivation of survivors. By designing effective branding strategies, organizations can influence public attitude towards them. Employees’ word of mouth and positive brand image raises inflow of talent within organizations. Future research can be carried out in other industries to test validity of the model. A longitudinal study would also help analyze the causal relationship among variables. The conceptual framework can also be tested in other countries to verify the hypothesized relationships. References Adelman, K. (2012). Promoting employee voice and upward communication in healthcare: the CEO's influence. Journal of Healthcare Management, 57(2), 133. Agca, V., Topal, Y., & Kaya, H. (2012). Linking intrapreneurship activities to multidimensional firm performance in Turkish manufacturing firms: an empirical study. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 8(1), 15–33. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Alderfer, C. P. (1972). Human needs in organizational settings. New York: Free Press. Al-Ghamdi, S. M., Roy, M. H., & Ahmed, Z. U. (2007). How employees learn about corporate strategy: An empirical analysis of a Saudi manufacturing company. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 14(4), 273–285. Ambler, T., & Barrow, S. (1996). The employer brand. Journal of Brand Management, 4(3), 185–206.

Antoncic, B., & Hisrich, R. D. (2001). Intrapreneurship: Construct refinement and cross-cultural validation. Journal of business venturing, 16(5), 495–527. Appelbaum, S. H., & Donia, M. (2000). The realistic downsizing preview: a management intervention in the prevention of survivor syndrome (part I). Career Development International, 5(7), 333–350. Armstrong‐Stassen, M. (2002). Designated redundant but escaping lay‐off: A special group of lay‐off survivors. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75(1), 1–13. Armstrong, M., & Taylor, S. (2014). Armstrong's handbook of human resource management practice. Kogan Page Publishers. Backhaus, K., & Tikoo, S. (2004). Conceptualizing and researching employer branding. Career Development International, 9(5), 501–517. Baer, M., & Frese, M. (2003). Innovation is not enough: Climates for initiative and psychological safety, process innovations, and firm performance. Journal of organizational behavior, 24(1), 45–68. Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1963). Social learning and personality development. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Baruch, Y., & Hind, P. (2000). “Survivor syndrome”-a management myth?. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 15(1), 29–45. Bass, B. M., Avolio, B. J., Jung, D. I., & Berson, Y. (2003). Predicting unit performance by assessing transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of applied psychology, 88(2), 207. Berthon, P., Ewing, M., & Hah, L. L. (2005). Captivating company: dimensions of attractiveness in employer branding. International journal of advertising, 24(2), 151–172. Beylerian, M., & Kleiner, B. H. (2003). The downsized workplace. Management Research News, 26(2/3/4), 97–108. Bhatnagar, J. (2008). Managing capabilities for talent engagement and pipeline development. Industrial and commercial training, 40(1), 19–28. Biswas, S., & Bhatnagar, J. (2013). Mediator analysis of employee engagement: role of perceived organizational support, PO fit, organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Vikalpa,38(1), 27–40. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. Transaction Publishers. Bollen, K. A. (1989). A new incremental fit index for general structural equation models. Sociological Methods & Research, 17(3), 303–316. Brockner, J., & Greenberg, J. (1990). The impact of layoffs on survivors: An organizational justice perspective. In J. S. Carroll (Ed.), Applied social psychology and organizational settings (pp. 45 – 75). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Bock, G. W., Zmud, R. W., Kim, Y. G., & Lee, J. N. (2005). Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces, and organizational climate. MIS quarterly, 87–111. Bontis, N., & Fitz-Enz, J. (2002). Intellectual capital ROI: a causal map of human capital antecedents and consequents. Journal of Intellectual capital, 3(3), 223–247. Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2005). Resonant Leadership: Renewing Yourself and Connecting with Others Through Mindfulness, Hope, and Compassion. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Boyatzis, R. E. D., Rochford, K., & Taylor, S. (2015). The role of the positive and negative emotional attractors in vision and shared vision: toward effective leadership, relationships and engagement. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 217. Buse, K. R., & Bilimoria, D. (2015). Personal vision: enhancing work engagement and the retention of women in the engineering profession. In R. E. Boyatzis, K. Rochford, S. N. Taylor, The Impact of Shared Vision on Leadership, Engagement, and Organizational Citizenship (116–128). Frontiers in Psychology. Cameron, K. S. (1994). Strategies for successful organizational downsizing. Human Resource Management, 33(2), 189–211. Celani, A., & Singh, P. (2011). Signalling theory and applicant attraction outcomes. Personnel Review, 40(2), 222–238. Civi, E. (2000). Knowledge management as a competitive asset: a review. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 18(4), 166–174.

Daft, R.L., & Lengel, R.H. (1984). Information richness: a new approach to managerial behavior and organizational design. Research in organizational behavior (Homewood, IL: JAI Press),6, 191–233 Datta, D. K., Guthrie, J. P., Basuil, D., & Pandey, A. (2010). Causes and effects of employee downsizing: A review and synthesis. Journal of Management,36(1), 281–348. DeConinck, J., Johnson, J. U. L. I. E., Busbin, J. A. M. E. S., & Lockwood, F. R. A. N. K. (2008). An examination of the validity of the Downs and Hazen communication satisfaction questionnaire. Marketing management journal, 18(2), 145–153. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology, 53(6), 1024. Deloitte (2013).Resetting Horizons: Human Capital Trends 2013. Retrieved from: http://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/HumanCapital/dttl-hc hctrendsglobal8092013.pdf. Devine, K., Reay, T., Stainton, L., & Collins‐Nakai, R. (2003). Downsizing outcomes: Better a victim than a survivor?. Human Resource Management, 42(2), 109–124. De Vries, M. F. K., & Balazs, K. (1997). The downside of downsizing. Human relations, 50(1), 11–50. Doherty, N., & Horsted, J. (1995). Helping survivors to stay on board. People Management, 1(1), 26–31. Dolphin, R. R. (2005). Internal communications: Today's strategic imperative. Journal of Marketing Communications, 11(3), 171–190. Downs, C. W., & Hazen, M. D. (1977). A factor analytic study of communication satisfaction. Journal of business communication, 14(3), 63–73. Dutton, J. E., Worline, M. C., Frost, P. J., & Lilius, J. (2006). Explaining compassion organizing. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(1), 59–96. Eddy, E. R., Tannenbaum, S. I., Lorenzet, S. J., & Smith-Jentsch, K. A. (2005). The influence of a continuous learning environment on peer mentoring behaviors. Journal of Managerial Issues, 383–395. Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. Fong, K., & Kleiner, B. H. (2004). New development concerning the effect of work overload on employees. Management Research News, 27(4/5), 9–16. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of marketing research, 18(3), 382–388. Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). What good are positive emotions?. Review of general psychology, 2(3), 300. Freeman, R. & McVea, J. (2001). A stakeholder approach to strategic management. Working paper, Darden Business School, 16 March. Gandolfi, F. (2006). Corporate downsizing demystified: A scholarly analysis of a business phenomenon. ICFAI University Press. Gibbons, J. (2006). Employee engagement: A review of current research and its implications. New York: The Conference Board. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2002). The new leaders: Transforming the art of leadership into the science of results (p. 14). London: Little, Brown. Greenglass, E. R., & Burke, R. J. (2001). Editorial introduction downsizing and restructuring: Implications for stress and anxiety. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 14(1), 1–13. Guchait, P., Cho, S., & Meurs, J. A. (2015). Psychological Contracts, Perceived Organizational and Supervisor Support: Investigating the Impact on Intent to Leave Among Hospitality Employees in India. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 14(3), 290–315. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Printice Hall. Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: a meta-analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 87(2), 268–279. Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J.T., & Rapson, R.L. (1994). Emotional contagion. Cambridge university press, Paris.

Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724. Khatri, N., Fern, C. T., & Budhwar, P. (2001). Explaining employee turnover in an Asian context. Human Resource Management Journal, 11(1), 54–74. Koonce, R. (1991). The people side of organizational change. Credit Magazine, 17(6), 22–5. Lenka, U. & Tiwari, B. (2016). Achieving triple “P” bottom line through resonant leadership: an Indian perspective. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 65(5), 694–703. Lin, H. F. (2007). Effects of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation on employee knowledge sharing intentions. Journal of Information Science, 33(2), 135−149. Lockwood, N. R. (2007). Leveraging employee engagement for competitive advantage. SHRM Research Quarterly, 52(3), 1–12. London, M., & Smither, J. W. (1999). Empowered self‐development and continuous learning. Human Resource Management, (38), 3–15. Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and organizational psychology, 1(1), 3–30. Macky, K. A. (2004). Organisational downsizing and redundancies: The New Zealand workers' experience. New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 29(1), 63–87. McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extentions of men. New York: McGraw-Hill. McManus, J., & Mosca, J. (2015). Strategies To Build Trust And Improve Employee Engagement. International Journal of Management & Information Systems (Online), 19(1), 37–42. Miles, E. W., Patrick, S. L., & King, W. C. (1996). Job level as a systemic variable in predicting the relationship between supervisory communication and job satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 69(3), 277–292. Neves, P. (2014). Taking it out on survivors: Submissive employees, downsizing, and abusive supervision. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 87(3), 507–534. Noe, R. A., & Wilk, S. L. (1993). Investigation of the factors that influence employees' participation in development activities. Journal of applied psychology, 78(2), 291. Noer, D. (1993). Healing the wounds: Overcoming the trauma of layoffs and revitalizing downsized organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization science, 5(1), 14–37. Nonaka, L., Takeuchi, H., & Umemoto, K. (1996). A theory of organizational knowledge creation. International Journal of Technology Management, 11(7-8), 833–845. Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996). Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work. Academy of management journal, 39(3), 607–634. Pinchot, G., & Pellman, R. (1999). Intrapreneurship in Action: A Handbook for Business Innovation. Berrett‐Koehler Publishers, San Francisco, CA. Pincus, J. D. (1986). Communication satisfaction, job satisfaction, and job performance. Human communication research, 12(3), 395–419. Punjaisri, K., Wilson, A., & Evanschitzky, H. (2009). Internal branding to influence employees' brand promise delivery: a case study in Thailand. Journal of Service Management, 20(5), 561–579. Ramaswamy, V. (2009). Leading the transformation to co-creation of value. Strategy & Leadership, 37(2), 32–37. Richey, M. W. (1992). The impact of corporate downsizing on employees. Business Forum, 17(3), 9–13. Ruck, K., & Trainor, S. (2012). Developing Internal Communication Practice That Supports Employee Engagement. Public Relations and Communication Management: The State of the Profession, 138. Sahdev, K. (2004). Revisiting the survivor syndrome: The role of leadership in implementing downsizing. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 13(2), 165-196. Sahdev, K., Vinnicombe, S., & Tyson, S. (1999). Downsizing and the changing role of HR. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 10(5), 906–923.

Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of managerial psychology, 21(7), 600–619. Sayeed, O. B., & Gazdar, M. K. (2003). Intrapreneurship: assessing and defining attributes of intrapreneurs. Journal of Entrepreneurship, 12(1), 75–89. Schaper, M., & Volery, T. (2007). Entrepreneurship and small business: A Pacific Rim perspective. Milton Qld: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd. - ISBN 0-470-81082-3.Wiley. Schepers, P., & Van den Berg, P. T. (2007). Social factors of work-environment creativity. Journal of Business and Psychology, 21(3), 407–428. Schollhammer, H. (1982). Internal corporate entrepreneurship. In C.A. Kent, D.L. Sexton, and K.H. Vesper, eds., Encyclopedia of Entrepreneurship. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Sharma, N., & Kamalanabhan, T. J. (2012). Internal corporate communication and its impact on internal branding: Perception of Indian public sector employees. Corporate Communications: An International Journal. 17(3), 300–322. Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1999). Goal striving, need satisfaction, and longitudinal well-being: the self-concordance model. Journal of personality and social psychology, 76(3), 482. Shuck, B., & Wollard, K. (2010). Employee engagement and HRD: A seminal review of the foundations. Human Resource Development Review, 9(1), 89–110. Stander, M. W., & Rothmann, S. (2010). Psychological empowerment, job insecurity and employee engagement. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 36(1), 1–8. Tajfel, H. & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. The social psychology of intergroup relations, 33(47), 74. Tannenbaum, S. I. (1997). Enhancing continuous learning: Diagnostic findings from multiple companies. Human Resource Management, 36(4), 437–452. Travaglione, A., & Cross, B. (2006). Diminishing the social network in organizations: does there need to be such a phenomenon as ‘survivor syndrome’ after downsizing?.Strategic Change,15(1), 1–13. Van den Hooff, B., & De Ridder, J. A. (2004). Knowledge sharing in context: the influence of organizational commitment, communication climate and CMC use on knowledge sharing. Journal of knowledge management, 8(6), 117–130. Virick, M., Lilly, J. D., & Casper, W. J. (2007). Doing more with less: An analysis of work life balance among layoff survivors. Career Development International, 12(5), 463–480. Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Welch, M. (2011). The evolution of the employee engagement concept: communication implications. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 16(4), 328–346. Welch, M., & Jackson, P. R. (2007). Rethinking internal communication: A stakeholder approach. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 12(2), 177–198. Wong, C. A., Cummings, G. G. & Ducharme, L. (2013). The relationship between nursing leadership and patient outcomes: a systematic review update. Journal of nursing management, 21(5):709–724. Yi, J. (2009). A measure of knowledge sharing behavior: scale development and validation. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 7(1), 65–81. Zmud, R. W. (1978). An empirical investigation of the dimensionality of the concept of information. Decision sciences, 9(2), 187–195.

Talent Development enablers

Vision

Resonant leadership

Compassion

Overall Positive Mood

Organization integration

Corporate information

Communication climate

Media quality

H1 Internal Corporate Communication

Physical engagement

Cognitive engagement

H2

Emotional engagement

Knowledge sharing Intention Knowledge sharing Behaviour

Behavioural engagement

Knowledge sharing

Knowledge sharing Process

H3

Top management Support

Continuous Learning

Risk Tolerance

Employer branding

Employee Engagement

H4

H7

Psychological Safety Functional benefits

H5

Innovation

Economic benefits Risk Taking

Intrapreneurship

Psychological benefits

Self-renewal

H6

Proactiveness

Supervisory Communication

Perceived communication satisfaction

Subordinate Communication Co-worker Communication Personal Feedback

Figure 1: A conceptual framework of employee engagement with hypothesized relationships

Physical engagement

Cognitive engagement Organization integration Corporate information Communication climate

Internal Corporate Communication

Emotional engagement

Behavioural engagement

Media quality H2 (.75) Knowledge sharing Intention Knowledge sharing Behaviour

Knowledge sharing

Knowledge sharing Process

H3 (.80)

Top management support Risk Tolerance

Continuous Learning

H4 (.81)

Employee Engagement

H7 (.88)

Psychological safety

Innovation

H5 (.79) Functional benefits

Risk Taking

Intrapreneurship Economic benefits Self-renewal

H6 (.84) Psychological benefits

Proactiveness

Supervisory Communication Subordinate Communication Co-worker Communication

Perceived communication satisfaction

Personal Feedback

Figure 2: Improved model

Employer branding

Table 1: Results of Measurement Model: Scale Reliability and Validity Construct

Items

M

SD

λ

AVE

CR

I. Resonant Leadership My leader Vision

Develops a vision of my future in the organization.

3.80

0.65

0.75

Assures my future is better than my past.

0.77

Motivates me to attain my personal goals.

0.80

Clarifies my tasks to be performed.

0.78

Assures that my job is secure.

0.75

Expresses confidence in my abilities to achieve

0.77

0.59

0.94

0.66

0.92

organizational goals. Sets clear direction to manage change in organization.

0.78

Discusses

developmental

0.75

Ensures that my personal goals are aligned with

0.75

about

my

career

opportunities.

organizational goals. Speaks positive about the mission, vision and future

0.78

plans of organization. Helps in setting meaningful goals for my growth.

0.73

Participate in problem solving and decision making.

0.82

My leader Compassion

Is trustworthy. Takes care of my well-being.

3.70

0.79

0.82 0.85

GFI

CFI

NFI

RMSEA

.88

.89

.90

.07

Empathizes with me to relieve my pain and grief.

0.86

Manages stressful situations calmly.

0.78

Develops trust by sharing information with me.

0.82

Openly express my feelings and concerns.

0.75

My leader Overall positive mood

Helps in improving my work conditions.

3.76

0.86

0.79

Spreads a feel good factor to work in organization.

0.85

Makes me cheerful and in good spirits to work here.

0.81

0.67

0.90

.95

II. Internal corporate communication My organization Organization

Fairly communicates departmental policies and goals.

3.71

0.77

0.81

0.67

0.93

0.69

0.90

integration Encourages coordination and support in performing

0.83

tasks. Invests in training and development of competencies.

0.88

Informs about Corporate mission and goals.

0.86

Informs about developmental policies for my growth.

0.75

Supports to generate new ideas by ignoring my past

0.78

failures. Provide training and development facilities.

0.82

My organization Corporate information

Inform about revised policies and goals.

3.73

0.82

0.85

.88

.96

.08

Informs about changes in products, services, and

0.85

technologies. Informs about its financial standing.

0.78

Provide autonomy to explore innovative ideas.

0.84

My organization Communication

Motivates me through organizational achievements and 3.65

climate

success stories.

0.84

Truly values my contribution towards organizational

0.79

0.65

0.92

0.67

0.89

0.78

success. Recognizes

and

rewards

me

for

developing

0.83

Provide a psychologically safe environment to take

0.83

competencies to handle problems.

risks. Provide psychological counselling and support to deal

0.81

with anger and stress. Provide a motivating and supportive work climate.

0.79

My organization Media quality

Conducts well scheduled meetings.

3.78

Facilitates informal and healthy communication. Provides

clear

and

concise

written

rules

0.78

0.77 0.86

and

0.82

regulations. Provides interesting and helpful publications. III. Knowledge sharing

0.82 .89

.87

.90

.08

My subordinates Knowledge sharing

Feel self-motivated by sharing their success stories 3.86

process

with each other.

0.67

Give feedback to help others in performing tasks.

0.74

0.57

0.72

0.64

0.93

0.63

0.77

0.76

My subordinates Knowledge sharing

Contribute their ideas to company’s databases such as 3.89

behaviour

journals, magazines, or newsletters.

0.64

0.86

Share information related to current work.

0.77

Express their opinions and suggestions in meetings.

0.79

Participate and ask questions in brainstorming

0.82

sessions. Share their experiences to avoid risks.

0.76

Use digital communication to deal with work-related

0.78

problems. Share their knowledge on specific topics with common

0.83

interests. My subordinates Knowledge sharing

Make an effort to share their ideas.

3.92

0.82

0.77

intention Frequently interact with each other.

0.82 .92

IV. Continuous learning My organization provides employees Top management

Learning and development throughout their tenure.

3.76

0.77

0.79

0.62

0.95

.89

.85

.07

support Clarity in procedures for accomplishment of their

0.83

tasks. High quality and relevant training programs.

0.78

Constructive feedback on initiating new procedures to

0.78

accomplish tasks. Infrastructure and financial support.

0.77

Autonomy to handle their work accordingly.

0.74

Workshops, conferences, and seminars to develop their

0.83

competencies. My organization Set goals based on the training received.

0.83

Align employees’ personal goals with business

0.85

objectives. Recognize employees for using new skills for career

0.78

advancement. Uses development centres to identify employee’s key

0.73

attributes, competencies and areas for development. Creates developmental plans such as on-the-job

0.74

learning and new assignments. My organization provides employees Risk tolerance

Flexible goals to encourage creative ideas. Opportunities to learn from past mistakes.

3.74

0.82

0.80 0.89

0.73

0.91

Opportunities to take risks in performing challenging

0.85

tasks. Opportunities to learn and nourish themselves.

0.88

My subordinates Psychological safety

Feel free to ask each other’s assistance at work.

4.75

0.71

0.75

Discuss task related problems freely.

0.82

Never criticize each other’s efforts.

0.79

Value each other’s skills and talents.

0.77

0.61

0.86

.87

V. Intrapreneurship My organization encourages employees to Innovation

Develop new procedures and

practices to foster 3.75

0.75

0.78

0.68

0.89

0.63

0.77

0.67

0.80

innovation. Use web based services to share information.

0.80

Suggests significant changes in product or service

0.88

lines. Launch new products or services.

0.83

My organization Risk taking

Take relevant steps to exploit opportunities and 3.74

0.86

0.82

achieve organizational objectives. Take high-risk projects.

0.76

My organization adopts Proactiveness

New techniques in administration and operating 3.71 technologies.

0.87

0.85

.89

.90

.07

Maintains benchmark over its competitors.

0.78

My organization Self-renewal

Provides resources needed for innovation.

3.82

0.77

Maintain coordination among departments to enhance

0.78

0.66

0.90

0.86

innovation. Adopts flexible approach to increase innovation.

0.84

Revises its existing strategy to deal with business

0.77

uncertainties. Redefines its mission for reviving its image.

0.80 .89

VI. Perceived communication satisfaction My leader Supervisory

Listens to my problems patiently.

3.85

0.72

0.80

0.61

0.82

0.64

0.84

0.64

0.87

communication Guides me to solve work related problems.

0.75

Learn new skills.

0.79

My leader Personal feedback

Provides feedback to enhance my learning.

3.82

0.72

Tells me updated information about customer’s

0.87 0.75

requirements for product innovations. Provides feedback on my task performances.

0.77

My subordinates Subordinate communication

Seek information from me

3.97

0.66

0.76

.91

.86

.08

Are open to suggestions and criticisms.

0.83

Give me updates about their day-to-day activities.

0.79

Have one-to-one interactions with me.

0.81

My colleagues Co-worker

Are compatible to take challenging tasks.

3.93

0.68

0.75

0.66

0.89

communication Share their ideas with each other.

0.84

Have clear and transparent communication with me.

0.84

Trust each other in performing tasks.

0.82 .90

VII. Employee engagement My subordinates Physical engagement

Can work too hard.

4.29

0.83

0.74

Can stay for long hours until the job is done.

0.80

Exert lot of efforts to perform their jobs.

0.73

0.57

0.80

0.62

0.90

My subordinates are Emotional

Enthusiastic to take up challenges in their job.

3.87

0.57

0.81

engagement Emotionally attached with their job.

0.77

Committed to the core values of organization.

0.78

Loyal and speak positive about organization.

0.74

Valued and appreciated.

0.79

Perceiving their job as interesting and meaningful.

0.83

My subordinates are

.93

.91

.07

Cognitive engagement

Engrossed in their work.

3.89

0.66

0.81

Happy to work intensely.

0.76

Paying a lot of attention in performing tasks.

0.79

Eager to learn and develop technical skills to achieve

0.77

0.61

0.86

0.61

0.83

their job goals. My subordinates are Behavioural

Having clear understanding of what is expected from 3.96

engagement

them at work.

0.67

0.77

Proud and positive about their job profiles.

0.76

Always persevere, even when things do not go well at

0.82

work. .89

VIII. Employer branding My organization provides opportunities to employees for Functional benefits

Their professional growth.

3.82

0.80

0.88

Learning advanced technologies.

0.85

Promotion.

0.74

Training on employability skills for innovative projects

0.77

0.66

0.88

0.59

0.92

My organization provides employees Economic benefits

Rewards as star performers. Opportunities to initiate new projects as idea

3.68

0.79

0.75 0.78

champions. Fairness in pay for performance to enhance their self-

0.76

.89

.92

.06

esteem. Family friendly policies such as health care and

0.80

dependent care assistance plans. Fair compensation packages by benchmarking with its

0.82

competitors. Note: M = Mean, SD =Rewards Standardfordeviation, λ = Standardized loading, AVE = Average variance extracted, being innovative and proactive. 0.86 CR = Composite reliability Recognition for their outstanding performances.

0.78

My organization Psychological benefits

Provides a continuous learning environment to 3.82

0.76

0.78

enhance employees’ self-esteem. Provides a psychologically safe environment to share

0.75

ideas and solve work related problems. Establishes friendly relationships among employees by

0.78

organizing social events, fun games, and clubs. Helps in maintaining a balance between employees’

0.76

family and work life. Treats employees with respect and care.

0.77

Takes care of employee’s health and well-being.

0.78

Is known as a good place to work.

0.75

Is known for its superior quality of products/ services.

0.79

0.59

0.92

Table 2: Inter-Correlation among studied constructs

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1. RL

80

2. ICC

15

83

3. KS

13

23*

78

4. CL

18

21*

39** 81

5. INT

14

40** 33** 36** 77

6. PCS

14

44** 34** 27** 38** 79

7. EE

18

68** 73** 68** 71** 68** 84

8. EB

17

61** 60** 66** 81** 58** 69** 78

Correlation coefficients are obtained as the number given in the cells divided by 100 *Significant at p ≤ 0.05; **Significant at p ≤ 0.01; ***Significant at p ≤ 0.001 Values in the diagonals are square root of average variance extracted measuring discriminant validity Note: RL = Resonant Leadership; ICC = Internal Corporate Communication; KS = Knowledge Sharing; CL = Continuous Learning; INT = Intrapreneurship; PCS = Perceived Communication Satisfaction; EE = Employee Engagement; EB = Employer Branding.

Table 3: Results of Hypothesized Model Hypotheses

Standardized path

Hypothesized directions

coefficients

Critical ratios -1.76

Results

H1

Resonant Leadership

Employee Engagement

-.07

H2

Internal Corporate Communication

Employee Engagement

.71

6.10***

Not supported Supported

H3

Knowledge Sharing

Employee Engagement

.78

6.35***

Supported

H4

Continuous Learning

Employee Engagement

.79

7.05***

Supported

H5

Intrapreneurship

Employee Engagement

.77

6.24***

Supported

H6

Perceived communication satisfaction

Employee Engagement

.80

7.16***

Supported

H7

Employee Engagement

Employer Branding

.81

7.47***

Supported

Critical ratios

Results

*significant at p ≤ 0.05; **significant at p ≤ .01; ***significant at p ≤ .001

Table 4: Results of Improved Model Hypotheses

Standardized path

Hypothesized directions

coefficients

H2

Internal Corporate Communication

Employee Engagement

.75

7.13***

Supported

H3

Knowledge Sharing

Employee Engagement

.80

7.77***

Supported

H4

Continuous Learning

Employee Engagement

.81

7.82***

Supported

H5

Intrapreneurship

Employee Engagement

.79

7.58***

Supported

H6

Perceived communication satisfaction

Employee Engagement

.84

8.19***

Supported

H7

Employee Engagement

Employer Branding

.88

8.75***

Supported

*significant at p ≤ 0.05; **significant at p ≤ .01; ***significant at p ≤ .001

Table 5: Fit Measures of Two Models Conceptual models

χ2/df

GFI

CFI

NFI

RMSEA

Hypothesized model

3.31

0.89

0.92

0.86

0.09

Improved model

2.23

0.90

0.96

0.91

0.07