IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

A strategy to assist management in workforce engagement and employee retention in the high tech engineering environment

Listed author(s):
  • Kennedy, Elizabeth
  • Daim, Tugrul U.
Registered author(s):

    Many companies use survey methods in an attempt to gauge employees' attitudes and opinions toward the company. These attitudes and opinions are directly related to an employee's engagement within the company. In many instances, employees wait in vain for the survey response and the subsequent employer actions, but the truth is sometimes management does not know what to do with the results. For this reason, we theorize that this type of survey, typically utilizing the Likert-scale, is not adequately assisting management in addressing employee engagement and retention issues. For instance, in many occasions, once the survey results are tabulated, companies are doing little or nothing to address the issues. In fact, far too many companies make the mistake of conducting employee engagement surveys, and then ignore the answers. Thus, we propose that a company should take advantage of the survey results, and utilize them to provide data to bridge employees' needs and goals with stakeholders' responsibilities and goals by refining and incorporating them into a hierarchical decision model (HDM). Thus, this would essentially be utilizing the quantitative data to determine what to measure qualitatively. We use a case from the high tech industry, specifically focusing on the engineering environment. Engineering environments are known to be more creative and such approaches would be more beneficial.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Evaluation and Program Planning.

    Volume (Year): 33 (2010)
    Issue (Month): 4 (November)
    Pages: 468-476

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:33:y:2010:i:4:p:468-476
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:33:y:2010:i:4:p:468-476. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.