Cited by 213Job Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorWorkaholism, burnout, and well-beingWorkplace Health and Well-being

The drivers of work engagement: a meta-analytic review of longitudinal evidence

Lesener, Tino, Gusy, Burkhard, Jochmann, Anna, Wolter, Christine·2020·Work & Stress

Abstract

Work engagement is currently one of the most popular outcomes in occupational health psychology. According to the motivational process within the job demands-resources (JD-R) framework, job resources stimulate work engagement, which in turn fosters job performance. While the general positive impact of job resources on work engagement is well established, it remains unclear how different types of job resources differentially predict work engagement over time. In our meta-analytic review, we identified 55 longitudinal studies that investigate the impact of various job resources on work engagement. To uncover the drivers of work engagement, we examined the differential impact of job resources on work engagement at group level, leader level, and organisational level via meta-analytic structural equation modelling. The findings suggest that job resources at each of the three levels predict work engagement over time. However, organisational-level resources (reflecting how the work is organised, designed and managed) contribute much more strongly to work engagement than group-level, and leader-level resources. All three levels of job resources and work engagement are highly stable. We advocate for interventions at any of the three levels. However, interventions at the organisational-level are most promising for enhancing work engagement and we thus strongly recommend strengthening those job resources.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02678373.2019.1686440

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 52 · Cited by 213

Authors
Lesener, T., Gusy, B., Jochmann, A., & Wolter, C.
Affiliations
Freie Universität Berlin (DE)
Corresponding author
Lesener, Tino
Venue
Work & Stress
Published
2019-11-05
Volume
34
Issue
3
Pages
259-278
ISSN
  • 0267-8373 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5335
OpenAlex
W2986043208
Cited by
213
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 42 · 2025: 46 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1
FWCI
18.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Work & Stress (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Workaholism, burnout, and well-being
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
Keywords
work engagement, job resources, job demands-resources model, employee performance, longitudinal stability, occupational health psychology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review