Exploring the Job Demands–Resources Model of Work Engagement in Government: Bringing in a Psychological Perspective

• Date: 01 September 2019
• Published date: 01 September 2019
• DOI: 10.1177/0734371X17729870
• Author: Peter M. Kruyen,Christiaan J. Lako,Rick T. Borst
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X17729870

Review of Public Personnel Administration

2019, Vol. 39(3) 372 –397

© The Author(s) 2017

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0734371X17729870

journals.sagepub.com/home/rop

Article

Exploring the Job Demands–

Resources Model of Work

Engagement in Government:

Bringing in a Psychological

Perspective

Rick T. Borst1, Peter M. Kruyen1,

and Christiaan J. Lako1

Abstract

Work engagement refers to an active energetic state of mind that is characterized

by vigor, dedication, and absorption. Despite practitioner’s attention for work

engagement, few public administration scholars have studied public servants’ work

engagement empirically. The goal of this study is to extend the job demands–resources

(JD-R) model of work engagement using insights from the public administration

literature. The analysis of a large-scale survey (N = 9,465) shows that (a) work and

personal resources, including public service motivation, are positively related to work

engagement; (b) red tape moderates these relationships; and (c) work engagement

mediates the relationship between JD-R and job outcomes. In conclusion, public

organizations can potentially increase work engagement and inherently employee

outcomes by increasing work-related resources (autonomy, cooperation with

colleagues) and selecting personnel with a proactive personality and high levels of

public service motivation.

Keywords

work engagement, job demands–resources, positive psychology, public service

motivation, red tape

1Institute for Management Research, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Corresponding Author:

Rick Borst, Department of Public Administration, Thomas van Aquinostraat 5.0.12c, P. O. Box 9108,

6500 HK Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Email: R.Borst@fm.ru.nl

729870ROPXXX10.1177/0734371X17729870Review of Public Personnel AdministrationBorst et al.

research-article2017

Borst et al. 373

Introduction

Work engagement—defined as “[ . . . ] a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind

that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption” (Schaufeli, Salanova,

González-Romá & Bakker, 2002, p. 74)—has become a popular research topic within

the management literature (Albrecht, Bakker, Gruman, Macey, & Saks, 2015; Saks &

Gruman, 2014). Studies show that employees who experience high levels of work

engagement are physically healthier, experience more satisfaction of their psychologi-

cal needs, are more satisfied, and are more committed than employees with little work

engagement (Barret-Cheetham, Williams, & Bednall, 2016; Ryff, 1989). Vigoda-

Gadot, Eldor, and Schohat (2012) therefore argued that work engagement is an impor-

tant complement to this field of research. Despite the attention for work engagement

in public organizations across the world (e.g., Cotton, 2012; Jansen, Van den Brink, &

Kole, 2010; Kernaghan, 2011; Lavigna, 2013), there is a dearth of research examining

work engagement in the public administration literature (Kernaghan, 2011; Tummers,

Steijn, Nevicka, & Heerema, 2016; Vigoda-Gadot et al., 2012).

The work engagement concept was developed in combination with the job

demands–resources (JD-R) model (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). At the heart of this

model lies the assumption that all aspects in work environments can be categorized

into job demands and job resources that either positively or negatively affect work

engagement (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). From the main idea of the JD-R model, it

can be deduced that it is a general model developed within the realm of “positive psy-

chology” (Bakker & Demerouti, 2008).

Interestingly, studies applying the JD-R model in combination with work

engagement do not take the specific circumstances of certain occupations and con-

texts into account (Bakker, Demerouti, & Sanz-Vergel, 2014; Bickerton, Miner,

Dowson, & Griffin, 2015; Gorgievski, Moriano, & Bakker, 2014). However,

Lavigna (2013, 2015) argued, for example, that the complex bureaucratic organiza-

tional structures in public organizations, the frequent changes of political leader-

ship, and specific motivations to work as a public servant might influence work

engagement. Several public administration scholars therefore call for more thor-

ough scholarly attention to analyze the meaning and practical usage of work

engagement in the public sector context (Kernaghan, 2011; Lavigna, 2015; Perry &

Vandenabeele, 2015; Vigoda-Gadot et al., 2012). The goal of this study is to extend

the JD-R model of work engagement by introducing insights from public adminis-

tration literature. Simultaneously, by introducing work engagement in public

administration literature, we bring in a “positive psychology” perspective into pub-

lic administration (Tummers et al., 2016).

Specifically, our contribution to the JD-R model of work engagement is three-

fold. First and foremost, we extend the JD-R model by clustering job resources into

two levels—organization-related resources and work-related resources. The prem-

ise of existing studies is that the more job resources employees have, the more

engaged they will be (Saks & Gruman, 2014). Although clusters of job resources

are proposed by some scholars (Schaufeli, 2015), all resources are treated as equally