Index

ABSTRACT

The model employs Partial Least Square (PLS) procedure on data that being collected via a survey that yielded 226 usable questionnaires. The goal of this study is to look into the indirect effect of employees’ satisfaction, teamwork, and employees’ engagement relationship in Malaysian airline companies in Malaysia. To analyse the causal relationships amongst employees’ satisfaction, teamwork, and employees’ engagement, the Structural Equation Model (SEM) was implemented. The results showed that employees’ satisfaction and teamwork enhance employees’ engagement in Malaysian airline companies in Malaysia. It is essential to do the research using an experimental design by using longitudinal data in Malaysian airline companies by means of vigorous measures. The findings recommend that the airlines' companies should put emphasis on employees’ satisfaction, and working environment to ensure the advantageous increase in airways employees’ engagement at their workplace. This research is one of the original recognized efforts to use employees’ satisfaction, and working environment to study employees’ engagement in the airline's sector in Malaysia by using Partial Least Square (PLS) procedure.

Keywords: Employees engagement, Employees satisfaction, Teamwork, Malaysian airlines sector, Business Administration, Structural equation modeling.

JEL Classification: M10 Business Administration: General.

DOI: 10.20448/802.71.71.79

Citation | Mohd Nazrin Burhanuddin; Zahir Osman; Valliappan Raju (2020). Mediating Effect of Satisfaction on the Relationship between Teamwork and Employees Engagement in Malaysian Airlines Sector in Malaysia. International Journal of Economics, Business and Management Studies, 7(1): 71-79.

Copyright: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License

Funding : This study received no specific financial support.

Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

History : Received: 7 January 2020 / Revised: 14 February 2020 / Accepted: 17 March 2020 / Published: 10 April 2020 .

Publisher: Online Science Publishing

1. INTRODUCTION

Airline is one of the well-known industries all over the world and rather regulated, it is also generally known for its strategic importance. Just as same as any others leading industries in the world, this industry contributes and generate millions in fact billions profit and creates lots of jobs opportunity direct or indirectly. However, this sector has viewed tons of conflict and turbulence in the previous decade and half of the problems are due to skyrocketing fuel prices, pandemics such as bird flu financial crises, and security breaches, viz., the terrorist attacks on 9/11 or can we call it as cancerous. This scenario has its own impact and implications in phrases of governments deregulating the markets, which occur to new idea and business models emerging that have made the industry more competitive. Over a period of times, two leading business kinds have the controls of the skies – the full-service carrier (FSC) and low-cost carrier (LCC) models. Employee engagement became a very popular concept at some stage in past two decades. Organizations strive to determine out if their employees are engaged and how to make them engaged through the usage of different surveys and tools to stay competitive and improve performance. There's a massive number of surveys that organizations can use to measure employee engagement. Unfortunately, no rely how it is measured, engagement has remained tremendously unchanged. According to Gallup (2018)  employee engagement is at an unimaginably low 13%. Engagement has turn out to be a key focus area for organizations around the world, and the growth in the industry has never been stronger.

One of the popular trends of contemporary companies is bettering teamwork to increase and maximise the efficiency and productivity (Salas, Stagl, & Burke, 2004). One of the most stand out issues in the history on teams has been the find out about of performance and effectiveness, which (McGrath, 1964) called "Team output". The conception of employee engagement has gain attraction considerable interest over the last decade (Hallberg & Schaufeli, 2006); (Demerouti, Bakker, De Jonge, Janssen, & Schaufeli, 2001); (Saks & Gruman, 2011). While research findings vary slightly, source of these examples shows a comparable conclusion that engaged employees seem to be an important source of organisational competitiveness (Teng, Huang, & Tsai, 2007); (Salanova & Schaufeli, 2008). Engaged employees are these who supply full discretionary effort at work, and are incredibly full of life and give the most to their job and task, unfortunately disengaged employees are those who are motivationally disconnected from work, who do no longer have the appetite to work hard or difficult and they are so called not enthusiastic at work (Bakker, Schaufeli, Leiter, & Taris, 2008). As we can see, by most accounts, employee engagement affects portions of productivity, profitability, employee retention and also customer services (Zigarmi, Nimon, Houson, Witt, & Diehl, 2009); (Xanthopoulou, 2009). Even so, now not much is offered in the modern body of knowledge concerning how great to stimulate employee engagement (Bakker., Hakanen, Demerouti, & Xanthopoulou, 2007) (Bakker & Schaufeli, 2008).

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Teamwork

Teamwork members are known to be flexible ample to make us in cooperative working environments where targets are gains through cooperation and social interdependence rather than individualised, competitive desires (Luca & Tarricone, 2001). Mankind history is created of a largely number of story of people working together or collectively as corporations in order to explore, acquire and conquer (Kozlowski & Ilgen, 2006). Nowadays, due to advanced technology, innovation, globalization, growing competitively, amongst other factors (Neves, Garrido, & Simões, 2008) advantageous teams have end up a critical component for industries and organizations in order to enhance performance, profitability, and supply a steady environment (Zaccaro, Rittman, & Marks, 2001). Over the year’s history has been stated, one of the main developments of modern organizations is bettering teamwork to enhance the efficiency and productivity (Salas et al., 2004). One of the most prominent concerns in the evaluations on teams has been the find out about of performance and effectiveness, which (McGrath, 1964) called "Team output". The higher influence and impact of the teamwork was additionally discovered by the analysis of this research; a higher correlation between teamwork and employee’s satisfaction allow opportunity to establish employee’s engagement in Malaysian Airlines companies.

2.2. Employees Satisfaction

In any industries employee satisfaction should be the highest priority (Saari & Judge, 2004){Saari, 2004 #26}{Saari, 2004 #26} over different perceptions, beliefs and attitudes which employees exhibit as it directly influences the general performance of the company. Satisfaction, as a way of perception and feeling, is additionally embedded with their corresponding acts, mentioned through Cranny, Smith, and Stone (1992) and summarised by Sageer, Rafat, and Agarwal (2012). It stipulates the accomplishment of a challenge and the undertaking of job obligations simply depends on the stage of pride that the employee perceives realistically.
Referring to Oscar, Kara, and Kaynak (2005) intrinsic variables, such as presenting difficult and greater job scheduling to employees and recognizing the human value of employees, had a positive effect on job accreditation. This used to be idea to extrinsic motivational key factors for pay and rewards, the company's set rules, and job safety which had a lesser have an impact on particular job experience, however, it deleted the job dissatisfaction of employees. In addition, as per (Ahmad, Wasay, & Jhandir, 2012) a relaxed workforce had its own influence among passenger carrier in these airlines’ community. As employees are an indispensable issue in increasing the level of customer service quality, they ought to also be able to resolve customer dissatisfaction in a repetitive way. Furthermore, worker attitude and the company's strategy are different, there’s argument which service excellence can be surely improved in a progressive manner. The higher influence and impact of the employee’s satisfaction was additionally discovered by the analysis of this research; a higher correlation between teamwork and employee’s satisfaction allow the opportunity to establish employee’s engagement in Malaysian Airlines companies.

2.3. Employees Engagement

Maslach and Leiter (1997) did the same idea in reintroduce the concept of engagement as a vigorous level of participation which lead to posited to be the opposite of burnout. Engaged employees who are discovered as hype about their works and take their task as a prior commitment  appear as the opposite to burnt-out employees who are stressed and vision their work as burden (Bakker et al., 2008). (Maslach & Leiter, 1997)  introduced to their argument via asserting that, if an employee is not engaged, he or she will be greater probable to pass to the different end of the continuum and experience burnout. The state of engagement is characterised as having the overflowing energy (as opposed to exhaustion), high participation (as opposed to cynicism) and efficacy (as opposed to lack of efficacy). González-Romá, Schaufeli, Bakker, and Lloret (2006) agree and supported this view and in addition characterised it via activation, identification and absorption. Activation is meaning to having an attendance of energy, identification is a positive relationship toward work, and absorption is being totally immersed in one’s job. This idea and concept of thought improved on (Kahn, 1990) the meaning of engagement as we understand ‘showing at work by summing three dimensions (as psychological meaningfulness, psychological safety and psychological availability).

The engagement has also been described as an single individual’s involvement, satisfaction and enthusiasm derived for work (Harter, Schmidt, & Hayes, 2002) This idea was once exploited from items in the Gallup Workplace Audit (The Gallup Organization, 1999) developed via the Gallup organisation, and this is idea and concept on employee perceptions of work characteristics. Analysation of work characteristics can become the cause in this definition having conceptual overlaps with job involvement and job satisfaction. First, job involvement is a concept that take counts on how a job helps define a person’s identity (Lawler & Hall, 1970). A man or woman who is worried in their job: (a) finds their job motivating, (b) is dedicated to their work and organisation and (c) contributed in professional relationships with co-workers (Brown, 1996). Thus, as Hallberg and Schaufeli (2006) argued, job involvement is a scheme of the individual and be viewed as an antecedent in a research model, whereas engagement, on the different hand, needs to be adopt as a structured variable in a role model. Furthermore, this definition contradicts with the term ‘job satisfaction’ Job pride clearly give us meaning on how strict an individual is with his or her job; it is a satisfying emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job (Locke, 1976). Twelve of the 13 objects used in the GWA give an explanation for the variance in job satisfaction. Concepts derived from the literature on pleasure were used in explaining engagement. Clearly, there are conceptual overlaps with each of these constructs describing engagement. Teamwork and employee’s satisfaction enable the opportunity for employee’s engagement to be established in Malaysian airlines companies, a higher correlation between teamwork and employee’s satisfaction will show an impact and influence on employees’ engagement in companies.

Based on the proposed conceptual development above, the following hypotheses were proposed:

1. There is a positive and significant influence of teamwork on satisfaction in Malaysian airline companies in Malaysia.

2. There is a positive and significant influence of satisfaction on employees’ engagement in Malaysian airline companies in Malaysia.

3.There is a mediating effect of satisfaction on the relationship between    teamwork and employees’ engagement in Malaysian airline companies in Malaysia.

3. RESEARCH METHOD

This research uses a survey questionnaire that was developed through rigorously assessing literature to discover appropriate scales that were used inside the research previously that have robust reliability and validity. A total of 15 observed variables made up the measurement of the unbiased variable of teamwork 5 items, satisfaction 5 items, and the established variable of employees’ engagement five items. 5-point Likert scale has been employed from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The personnel of Malaysian airline organizations in Malaysia has been the main respondents. From 315 questionnaires disbursed, 246 have been returned. This constituted a 78.09% response rate and it's far adequate to do statistical analysis of the use of SEM evaluation. From the 246 returned questionnaires, 237 have been completed and after outliers screening and removing, 226 questionnaires had been used for analysis and it is good enough to do statistics evaluation using SEM evaluation. The multivariate technique of statistical analysis was performed by using the Smartpls to assess the model and also to confirm whether the hypotheses are supported or not. The capability to ascertain the overall model measurement and to gauge the relationship among the latent variables and their measures were the main reason PLS-SEM method was adopted (Hair, Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2010). PLS-SEM algorithm was used to ascertain the model measurement in PLS-SEM approach. Then, the structural model estimation was performed by bootstrapping it and suggested the effects as such. Preacher and Hayes (2004) bootstrapping technique was used to confirm the significance of mediating effect through the computation of confidence interval’s lower level and confidence interval’s higher level.

4. DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULT

4.1. Common Method Bias

One major issue in management research is a common method bias. This takes place whilst the variance is attributed to the measurement scale in preference to the constructs the measures which rightfully to be represented in the study. To check up the measurement items bias in this study, Harman’s single factor was employed. The principal factor pointed out 28.15% after the principle components factor analysis was performed. It’s showed the principal factor did not hold the majority of variance explained and therefore it proves common method bias is absent. As suggested by Podsakoff and Organ (1986) who mentioned unless the variance explained percentage of principal component is exceeding 50%, there is no issue of common method bias.

4.2. Measurement Model

Assessment of construct measurement validity and reliability was performed by utilizing the measurement model through PLS-SEM Algorithm Figure 1. As such, the reliability and validity are the two important criteria applied in PLS-SEM analysis to appraise the goodness outer model as proposed by Hair, Hult, Ringle, and Sarstedt (2013). As depicted in Table 1, the composite reliability ranged from 0.871 to 0.915 for the first-order constructs. Therefore, the threshold of 0.70 and above (Hair, Hult, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2014) was met. Also, the statistical result showed the average variance extracted (AVE) ranged from 0.574 to 0.692 which are all greater than of 0.50, which signify all the latent variables have met the requirement of convergent validity (Hair et al., 2013). To confirm the presence of discriminant validity in this study, evaluation of cross-loading was performed. The statistical result revealed all items’ loadings were greater that their related cross-loadings Table 2. To further confirm the presence of the discriminant validity, the Hetrotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) ratio of correlation assessment as suggested by (Henseler, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2015) was performed. The HTMT ratio assessment result as shown in Table 3 revealed the HTMT criterion have attained and all ratios were below 0.9 (Henseler et al., 2015). Because of that, it was proven the reliability and validity of the latent variables was met (Hair et al., 2014).

Note: EE=Employees’ Engagement,  SAT=Satisfaction,  TW=Teamwork,  CA=Cronbach Alpha, CR=Composite Reliability,

4.3. Structural Model

To assess the structural model in this study, the path coefficient and R2 value as suggested by Hair et al. (2013) were adopted. 500 sub-samples PLS bootstrapping procedure was utilized to ascertain the path coefficients’ significance. Table 4 shows the hypotheses test results, path coefficients, and t-values. Hypothesis 1 predicts a positive relationship between teamwork and satisfaction and the result shows that there is a positive and significant influence of teamwork on satisfaction (ß = 0.745, t = 22.109); as a result, H1 is supported. The result of hypotheses 2 also reveals a significant and positive relationship between satisfaction and employees’ engagement (ß = 0.749, t = 22.228); thus, supporting H2. Last, the hypotheses 3 result also shows that there is a positive and significant mediating effect of satisfaction on teamwork and employees’ engagement relationship with a lower level of a confidence interval is 0.461 and the upper level of a confidence interval is 0.632 (Total indirect effect= 0.558); therefore, H3 is supported. This study also tested the R2 of the endogenous construct of employee engagement. 

5. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION

5.1.   Discussion

This study finding has proven that the relationship between teamwork and employees’ engagement among Malaysian airline companies in Malaysia is positively and significantly influenced by satisfaction. This study also shows an interesting point that airline employees are viewing teamwork plays a very important role in their organizations to allow them to be more engaged in their work. This may be due to the team that they are in where they need to communicate in order to get the assigned task complete. Group improvement programs look to extend levels of belief between a group of workers. This can be a basic component of working life and the establishment of worker engagement. Workers got to feel secure and comfortable in their workspace. When the competition gets to be undesirable in an organization and representatives are willing to toss one another beneath the transport in arrange to succeed, assurance and engagement both crashes. The aim of the collaboration is to demonstrate that as it were by working together, toward a bound together set of company goals, can the complete trade flourish. What is sweet for one representative is nice for everybody. Everybody at your company ought to be mindful of the effect they can have on the greater picture comes about of the organization as an entirety, and they ought to be certain that they are a trusted portion of a well-oiled machine.

As noted above, the finding suggests satisfaction has a high impact on teamwork and employees’ engagement in Malaysian airline agencies in Malaysia. There are considerable consequences of this finding. Firstly, Malaysian airline companies in Malaysia need to emphasize and construct their teamwork stronger. At the equal time, effort need to be taken to give a boost to employees’ pleasure mainly build-up an employee that can convey pride to a higher level. By focusing on teamwork by itself is now not enough. The method wishes to be developed and carried out to enhance employees’ satisfaction. By doing so, there will be a significant impact of teamwork on employees’ engagement and it will produce a tremendous and desired result. Early analysis of this find out about suggests that teamwork has an advantageous and direct affect employees’ engagement. However, after the introduction of satisfaction, the relationship was further strengthened. The whole oblique impact of teamwork to satisfaction and from satisfaction to employees’ engagement is 0.745*0.749=0.558. Because of that, Malaysian airline organizations have to ensure the personnel in their groups are in the right and fantastic teamwork where the satisfaction from teamwork can be built upon it. Information, opinion and free concept sharing have to be promoted to the airline employees. Airline personnel must be satisfied by way of the pinnacle management in the organizations that their businesses are the nice area to work. Airline pinnacle management must also make certain the employees that their groups will information and guide them in enhancing their engagement at the workplace.

5.2. Conclusion

The utilization of convenience sampling in data collection for analysis is one of the constraints faced in this study. Despite there are some benefits by using this method, such as trouble-free to find respondents, there are some shortages. This study cannot be taken a broad view without adopting convenience sampling. One more limitation of this study was the time constraint to meet up the paper's academic requisite. There was a cut-off date to ensure this paper was prepared based on academic research effort. Because of that, there is minimum time to permit the compilation of data and data analysis right after the data collection. The longitudinal study should be adopted to allow more time for the collection of data so that a better conclusion and in-depth repercussions can be drawn out are proposed for future study. The future study also should consider other wider construct that has an impact on employees’ engagement such as self-efficacy and organizational culture.

REFERENCES

Ahmad, M. B., Wasay, E., & Jhandir, S. U. (2012). Impact of employee motivation on customer satisfaction: Study of airline industry in Pakistan. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 4(6), 531-539.

Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2008). Positive organizational behavior: Engaged employees in flourishing organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 29(2), 147-154.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/job.515.

Bakker, A. B., Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., & Taris, T. W. (2008). Work engagement: An emerging concept in occupational health psychology. Work & Stress, 22(3), 187-200.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370802393649.

Bakker., A., Hakanen, J., Demerouti, E., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2007). Job resources boost work engagement, particularly when job demands are high. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(2), 274-284.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.274.

Brown, S. P. (1996). A meta-analysis and review of organizational research on job involvement. Psychological Bulletin, 120(2), 235-255.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.120.2.235.

Cranny, C. J., Smith, P. C., & Stone, E. F. (1992). Job satisfaction: How people feel about their jobs and how it affects their performance. New York: Lexington Books.

Demerouti, E., Bakker, A., De Jonge, J., Janssen, P., & Schaufeli, W. (2001). Burnout and engagement at work as a function of demands and control. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 27(4), 279-286.

Gallup. (2018). Gallup. Retrieved from https://www.gallup.com/education/194321/higher-education-employee-engagement.aspx. [Accessed December 6, 2019].

González-Romá, V., Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Lloret, S. (2006). Burnout and work engagement: Independent factors or opposite poles? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(1), 165-174.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2005.01.003.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). An primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). London: Sage Publication.

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Hallberg, U. E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2006). “Same same” but different? Can work engagement be discriminated from job involvement and organizational commitment? European Psychologist, 11(2), 119-127.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.11.2.119.

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), 268-268.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.268.

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.

Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692-724.Available at: https://doi.org/10.5465/256287.

Kozlowski, S. W., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7(3), 77-124.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x.

Lawler, E., & Hall, D. (1970). Relationship of job characteristics to job involvement, satisfaction, and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 54(4), 305-312.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0029692.

Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology.

Luca, J., & Tarricone, P. (2001). 18th Does emotional intelligence affect successful teamwork? Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education at the ASCILITE, p. 367 – 376, . Melbourne: University of Melbourne.

Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (1997). The truth about burnout. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

McGrath, J. E. (1964). Social psychology: A brief introduction. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Neves, J., Garrido, M., & Simões, E. (2008). Manual of personal, interpersonal and instrumental skills of theory and practice. Lisbon: Syllable Editions.

Oscar, W., Kara, A., & Kaynak, E. (2005). Determinants of business student satisfaction and retention in higher education: Applying Herzberg's two-factor theory. International Journal of Educational Management, 19(2), 128-139.

Podsakoff, P., & Organ, D. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531-544.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/014920638601200408.

Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(4), 717-731.Available at: https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03206553.

Saari, L., & Judge, T. (2004). Employee attitudes and job satisfaction. Retrieved from http://utm.edu/sta®/mikem/documents/jobsatisfaction.pdf. [Accessed February 19, 2020].

Sageer, A., Rafat, S., & Agarwal, P. (2012). Identification of variables affecting employee satisfaction and their impact on the organization. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 5(1), 32-39.Available at: https://doi.org/10.9790/487x-0513239.

Saks, A. M., & Gruman, J. A. (2011). Manage employee engagement to manage performance. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 4(2), 204-207.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2011.01328.x.

Salanova, M., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2008). A cross-national study of work engagement as a mediator between job resources and proactive behaviour. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(1), 116-131.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190701763982.

Salas, E., Stagl, K. C., & Burke, C. S. (2004). 25 years of team effectiveness in organizations: Research themes and emerging needs. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 19, 47-92.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/0470013311.ch2.

Teng, C.-I., Huang, K.-W., & Tsai, I.-L. (2007). Effects of personality on service quality in business transactions. The Service Industries Journal, 27(7), 849-863.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/02642060701570495.

The Gallup Organization. (1999). Gallup workplace audit (Copyright Registration Certificate TX-5 080 066). Washington, DC: U.S. Copyright Office.

Xanthopoulou, D. (2009). Work engagement and financial returns: A diary study on the role of job and personal resources. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82(1), 183-200.

Zaccaro, S. J., Rittman, A. L., & Marks, M. A. (2001). Team leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 12(4), 451-483.

Zigarmi, D., Nimon, K., Houson, D., Witt, D., & Diehl, J. (2009). Beyond engagement: Toward a framework and operational definition for employee work passion. Human Resource Development Review, 8(3), 300-326.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484309338171.