Engagement at Work: Investigating the Relationships Between
Age-Groups, Gender, Personality; and Trait Emotional Intelligence


Stuart M. Leeds and Ben Steeden [supervisor]


Faculty of Health and Applied Sciences, Department of Health and Social Sciences,
University of the West of England (UWE), Bristol



Purpose: To add to and extend existing research of engagement at work with new findings regarding age-groups, gender, personality; and trait emotional intelligence (TEI).

Design: A cross-sectional correlation study with added mediator and moderator analyses. Exploratory analyses include two-tailed correlation, hierarchical multiple linear regression and additional mediator analysis.

A simple research question reflects the title:

What is the relationship between age-groups, gender, personality, TEI and; engagement at work?

The introduction begins with a general overview of engagement at work with an original description and then offers a modernised definition suggesting that engagement is a state of mind where people work hard because they enjoy it, rather than being a static state. Engagement is then characterised by three dimensions: vigour, dedication and absorption, defining how engaged employees approach work; and gives examples of necessary workplace requirements for the positive benefits of engagement to occur. Some positive and negative aspects of engagement are discussed, from individual well-being, to exhaustion and burnout. Criticism of engagement measures is introduced suggesting an over-accentuation of positive aspects which negate the reality of occupational conflict. Then examples of lack of engagement among UK employees are given using the Gallup 2021 State of the Global Workplace Report, followed by examples of previous research showing that engagement can be affected and predicted by various individual differences. The remaining variables (age-groups and gender, personality; and TEI) are described; and their use in the research is justified. Three hypotheses are given:

\(159\) volunteers were recruited via bespoke online surveys measuring the usual demographics, personality, TEI; and work engagement of which \(88\) participants were used in the analysis. These were arranged into two age groups:


**Figure 1.** *Participant Numbers by Age-group and Gender*

Figure 1. Participant Numbers by Age-group and Gender


Of the main results:

**Figure 2.** *H1 Correlations between Engagement and Personality*.<br><em>Note:</em>
1= Engagement, 2= Extroversion, 3=Agreeableness, 4= Conscientiousness,
<br>5= Emotional Stability, 6= Openness to Experience. <em>N</em>= 88; *
<em>p</em> < .05; ** <em>p</em> < .01.” width=“80%” />
<p class= Figure 2. H1 Correlations between Engagement and Personality.
Note: 1= Engagement, 2= Extroversion, 3=Agreeableness, 4= Conscientiousness,
5= Emotional Stability, 6= Openness to Experience. N= 88; * p < .05; ** p < .01.


Exploratory results


Implications

  1. Theoretical:
    • Engagement theory is partially supported since personality can change in different circumstances, so one might be more engaged in their job at one time and not the next.
    • There is no direct support for older workers being engaged, but they might be engaged indirectly through various personality traits.
  2. Applied:
    • Recognise disengagement at work and offer support, especially for males (due to lack of support in this study).
    • Implement emotional intelligence training programmes to improve wellbeing; and reduce stress and anxiety at work.

Questions or additional information requests to be directed to the main author.

This summary is also published at:

  1. ProjectMatch: “Connecting business and students for great project partnerships”.
  2. ELEVATION OCC PSY: “Sharing Research”.