Rethinking the Changing Academic Atmosphere: Work Engagement, Motivational Potential and Performance of Employees of the University of the Immaculate Conception

Jo-Ann Y. Solomon, Renan P. Limjuco, Rene M. Babiera II


People are the building blocks of every organization. The employees are on their optimal job performances if they are in an affective-motivational state of mind, which is known as work engagement. This descriptive-correlation study, involving 105 employees of the University of the Immaculate Conception (UIC), aimed to describe their levels of work engagement, motivational potentials of certain job characteristics and performance. It also assessed how strongly work engagement and motivational potential of certain job characteristics relate to performance of the employees. Moreover, this investigation determined which one among these variables, namely, work engagement and motivational potential significantly influences employee performance. A 17-item questionnaire on Work and Well-being Survey by Schaufeli and Bakker (2003) was used to determine the level of work engagement. Job Diagnostic Survey Questionnaire by Hackman and Oldham (198) was used to measure the motivational potential of certain job characteristics. The performance evaluation result was used to describe performance level of personnel. Data was treated using mean, Pearson Product Moment Correlation, Multiple Regression. Findings revealed that work engagement of the employees is very high, motivational potential is high, and specifically, for the Support Service Personnel, both work engagement and motivational potentials are significant predictors of performance.


Academic human resource management, work engagement, motivational potential, performance, UIC Personnel, Philippines

Full Text:



Ali and Zia-ur-Rehman. (2014). “Impact of Job Design on Employee Performance, Mediating Role of Job Satisfaction: A Study of FMCG’s Sector in Pakistan.” International Journal of Business and Management. Retrieved


Bakker, A.B. & Leiter. (2010). “Work engagement.” Retrieved: http://

Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W.B. (2007). Dual processes at work in a call centre:An application of the job demands–recourses model. European Journal of Work andOrganizational Psychology, 12, 393-417.

Bates, S. (2004). ‘Getting engaged’, HR Magazine, Vol49, No 2, pp 44-51

Buckingham, M. (2001). ‘What a Waste’,People Management,11 October, pp36-39

Kirkpatrick, C.L., 2007. To invest, Coast or Idle: Second-Stage Teachers enact their Job Engagement. Paper Presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Conference.

Laguador, J.M. & Dotong, C.I. (2014). Knowledge versus Practice on the Outcomes-Based Education Implementation of the Engineering Faculty Members in LPU, International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development , 3(1), 63-74

Perrin, T. (2003). Working Today: Understanding What Drives Employee Engagement The 2003 Towers Perrin Talent Report U.S Report. [Online] Available Webc = HRS /USA/2003/200309/Talent_2003.pdf (October 30, 2008)

Richman, A. (2006), “Everyone wants an engaged workforce how can you create it? Workspan, Vol 49, pp 36

Saks, Alan M. (2006). “Antecedents and Consequences of Employee Engagement”. Joseph L. Rotman School of Management, Center for Industrial Relations and Human Resources, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Schaufeli, W.B., M. Salanova, V. Gonzalez-Roma and A.B. Bakker, 2002. The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. J. Happiness Stud., 3: 71-92.


  • There are currently no refbacks.