WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP 1

Method

Participants

Based on the purpose of the study, the data was collected from both the private and
public sector banks, including both male and female employees, where each employee had the
minimum work experience of 2 years in the particular organization. The total sample of the study
was 90 participants out of which the 52 participants worked in the private sector banks and the
rest 38 were employed in the public sector banks. The total number of males and females were
45 each, of which 60 participants lie within the age range of 25-30 and 30 participants were 35
and above. Each researcher collected the data on two participants. The demographic details of
the participants are given in Table 1.

Table 1: Demographic details of participants

Demographic Variables Participant 1 Participant 2

Gender Female Male
Educational qualification B.Com. MBA
Age 33 40
Marital status Married married
No. of dependents 2 5
Designation in the Personal banker Branch operation manager
organization
Tenure in the organization 6 years and 5 months 10 years
Tenure at the present 3 years 1 year+
designation
Type of Organization Housing development Housing development
finance corporation (private finance corporation (private
bank) bank)
WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP 2

Tools

To understand the concept of work engagement and leadership, the Utrecht Work Engagement
Scale and Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire were used. Utrecht Work Engagement Scale
was developed by Wilmar Schaufeli & Arnold Bakker in 2003. It measure three types of
engagement: vigour (high level of energy and strong identification with one's work), dedication
(deriving a sense of significance from ones work, feeling enthusiastic and proud about ones
job, and feeling inspired and challenged by it) and absorption (being totally and happily
immersed in ones work and having difficulties detaching oneself from). It is a self-scoring
questionnaire. It contains 17 items (6 vigour items, 5 dedication items, and 6 absorption items).
Responses to each of the 6 items are rated using a 7 point Likert Scale, ranging from Never to
Almost Every Day. To establish the reliability and validity of the data, Bakker conducted this
test on 9 countries, namely, Dutch, Germany, France, Norwegian Sweden, Finland, Spain,
Russian and Portuguese. The internal consistency reliability (alphas) of the UWES was found to
be quite good (i.e., 0.66). The UWES was administered twice with an interval of one year among
293 Australian Salvation Army officers and among 563 Norwegian paramedics, and the test-
retest reliability for Australian Salvation Army came out to be 0.64, whereas the test-retest
reliability for the Norwegian paramedics reliability came out to be 0.71.

Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire was developed by Bass and Avolio in 1994 & 1995. It
contains 45 items that identify and measure key leadership and effectiveness behaviours to be
strongly linked with individual and organizational success. It was designed with the 360-degree
feedback method. Participants are asked to respond to 45 items in the MLQ 5x-short (the current,
classic version) using a 5-point behavioural scale (Not at all to frequently if not always).
Approximately 15 minutes is required for completion. The MLQ is a well-established instrument
in the measure of transformational leadership and being extensively researched and validated.
Avolio and Basss MLQ manual shows strong evidence for validity, the MLQ has been used in
thousands of research programs, doctoral dissertations and masters theses, along with several
constructive outcomes for transformational leadership. Construct validity is also thoroughly
explained with factor-analysis which resulted in a six-factor model for the MLQ. In addition, a
study conducted by Antonkis ( ) supported the nine-factor leadership model and its stabilityin
WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP 3

homogeneous situations. Reliability scores for the MLQ subscales ranged from moderate to good
(i.e. from 0.74 to .94)

A semi-structured interview is a method of research that uses a set of questions that are open and
allow the new ideas to come up as a result of what the interviewee says. To qualitatively
understand the construct of work engagement and leadership, an interview schedule was
developed. Questions like Do you feel enthusiastic about coming to work? Why? Why not?,
What are those qualities that attracted you to work here?, What are all the positive aspects of
your work environment?, and Do you receive opportunities for personal and professional
growth at your workplace, . If you were the branch manager, how would you enhance the work
engagement of your employees etc. were asked. The semi-structured interview schedule was
specifically chosen for this research because questions can be prepared ahead of time. This
allows the interviewer to be prepared and appear competent during the interview. Also it allows
informants the freedom to express their views in their own terms. Semi-structured interviews
can provide reliable, comparable qualitative data.

Demographic profile sheet was also used in order to gather demographic details of the
participants.

Procedure

For the purpose of our research, we collected data from either a private sector or a public sector
bank. The senior manager of HDFC bank was contacted and one of the researchers from our
group took permission from him to administer the questionnaires and take interview on their
employees. The purpose of the research study was explained to the manager and he was assured
that the data will be used for research purpose only. When the senior manager was assured of the
confidentiality of the data, he provided the contact number of the branch manager of HDFC
bank, Greater Kailash. After contacting the branch manager, a suitable date and time was taken.
Then on the decided date and day, a group of five researchers went to the bank. A good rapport
was established with the branch manager and permission was sought for recording the
interviews. However, he strictly refused as it was against their HR policy. Hence, only process
notes were taken for the semi-structured interview. After this interaction with the manager, he
introduced us to some of his employees; one male and one female for each researcher.
WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP 4

It took us two days to collect the data from the bank. On the first day, we took interview and on
the second day, we got our questionnaires filled. Before starting with interview, we introduced
ourselves to the employee, formed rapport, explained the purpose of our research, gave all the
instructions and assured them of the confidentiality of their responses.

The scoring for both the scales i.e. Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire and Utrecht Work
Engagement Scale were done using the scoring key and the total scores were calculated. Each
student collected data from 2 participants, one male and one female. For individual analysis, raw
scores on MLQ were converted into percentile rank by referring to the norm table provided in
manual. Similarly, raw scores on UWES were assigned descriptive categories by referring to the
norm table provided in the manual.

After the data of all the researchers was pooled in, it was analyzed using SPSS. Descriptive
analysis included calculation of mean and S.D. for the four dimensions of Leadership
(transformational, transactional, passive avoidant and outcome leadership) and four dimensions
of Work Engagement scale (vigor, dedication, absorption and total). Correlational analysis was
done for the relationship between leadership styles and W.E. using Pearsons correlation
coefficient. Group differences between private and public sector employees were analyzed using
t-test (independent samples). Also, the interview data was content analyzed to qualitatively
explore the constructs of W.E. and leadership.
 WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP 5

RESULTS

Table 1: Raw Score and percentile ranks obtained by participants on MLQ

Dimensions Participant 1 (male) Participant 2 (female)

Raw Percentile Raw Percentile

scores Rank scores Rank

4 95 2.75 30
IA

IB 3.5 80 3 50

IM 4 95 3 60

IS 3.5 90 3 70

IC 3 60 2.5 30

Transformational 3.6 2.85

(total)-20 items

CR 3.75 95 2.75 40

MBEA 4 95 3 90

Transactional 3.88 2.87

(total)

MBEP 1.25 70 0.5 30

LF 0 20 0.25 30

Passive Avoidant 0.63 0.37

(total)

EE 3.67 90 3 70
WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP 6

EFF 4 95 3.25 50

SAT 3.5 80 3.5 80

Outcome of 3.78 3.22

Leadership
Success (total)

Table 2: Raw Score and Descriptive categories obtained by two participants on Work
Engagement Scale.

Dimensions Participant 1 (male) Participant 2 (female)

Raw score Descriptive Raw score Descriptive

category category

Vigor 4.83 high 3.66 Average

Dedication 5.4 high 3.4 Average

Absorption 4.16 average 3.33 Average

Table 3: Mean and SD for 4 dimensions on MLQ and 4 dimensions on Work Engagement

Dimensions Mean SD

TR 2.67 .63

TS 2.67 .71

PA 1.07 .71
WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP 7

OL 2.80 .72

VI 4.11 .84

DE 4.54 .99

AB 4.18 .95

Work
Engagement 4.28 .84
(total)

Table 4: Inter correlation among dimensions of MLQ and dimensions of Work

Engagement

Dimensions OL VI DE AB WE

TR .540** .230* .209* .108 .125

TS .593** .171 .216* .154 .181

PA -.137 -.233* -.189 -.090 -.200

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-

tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-
tailed).
WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP 8

Table 5: Mean, SD, t values and p value on dimension of MLQ and WE on public and
private sector employees.

Dimensions Public Private

Mean SD Mean SD t Value p Value

2.542 .6394 2.762 .6157 .103

TR -1.645

TS 2.4837 .80943 2.8151 .59931 -2.233* .028

PA 1.2446 .81195 .9474 .60659 1.989* .050

OL 2.63 .785 2.91 .667 -1.841 .069

VI 4.03 .863 4.17 .831 -.780 .437

DE 4.51 .954 4.56 1.037 -.234 .816

AB 4.23 .953 4.14 .964 .424 .673

WE (Total) 4.2389 .83874 4.3221 .85139 -.461 .646

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

 WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP 9

Table 6: Analysis of qualitative data through the process of directed content analysis.

Male Female

Experience of work the subject is very engaged in the subject feels enthusiastic
engagement his work as according to him about coming to work due to the
there is no end to learning, and good supervisor. She finds her
he feels enthusiastic about work challenging and inspiring
coming to work and has a good as she can go at higher level for
work-life balance. For him, solving the customer problems.
everyday is a challenge and one She also thinks that employee
has to be a good listener to should have good knowledge of
understand their customers. And their products.
also he wants that if customers
Evidence from the interview:
come with problems, hearing
should be there. And he also yes, these days I feel
likes his boss management style enthusiastic about coming to
towards his work. work. But, earlier it wasnt, like
before 6 months. As now
Evidence from the interview:
supervisor is good.
yes, I have the necessary skills
yes, I find my work inspiring
to undertake work-related tasks.
and challenging. As, I like
But, there is no stopping, HR
interacting with new customers,
sends training schedule and you
solving their queries, by going at
can give your name for
higher level also and solving it
training.
and satisfying the customer is a
yes, I feel enthusiastic about very big challenge
coming to work. After work, its
an engaged employee solves
9 for reaching home, and then I
customer queries fastly without
manage to spend time with my
delaying it, have product
kids also
knowledge, read circulars
 WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP
10
yes, I find my work inspiring regularly, is pro-active, punctual
and challenging. We come and presentable.
across different people (some
are polite, some harsh and
cribbing), everyday its a
challenge for you. You have to
be a good listener.

my boss is very good in his

work. He has one quality, we try
to inculcate i.e. his mail box is
empty at the end of the day, he
reads and reverts to every mail
daily, attend all queries. By this
customers will always be happy

Antecedents of Work Good working environment, Factors like good working

Engagement opportunities for personal and environment, chances to learn
professional growth, being new things, good relationship
friendly and kind to employees with colleagues, manager having
and helping them shows good understanding and friendly
engagement of the subject nature leads to good engagement
towards his work. of the subject towards her work.

work-environment is good: here, the physical environment

desktops, cleanliness, you got a is good
place to sit properly and have
opportunities for personal
lunch, ampful parking.
growth are not as such, for
there are opportunities for professional growth its okay
personal and professional kind of and yes, we get chances
 WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP
11
growth: training, personal to learn new things
effectiveness, elevation of role
my relationship with colleagues
I dont like boss and colleague and manager is good. Manager
type relationship. I like being is friendly, dont give us
friendly with everyone, pressure, give us proper time to
everyone treated well, cracking complete the task, always watch
jokes, but seriousness with us, but dont say anything until
work, helping them when they we go wrong and do something
get stuck with anything wrong. We can share our
personal stuff also and can get
help. Eg: once my husband was
not well, so he allowed me for
half days in that week.

Consequence of Work the participant is very the participant is happy with her
Engagement passionate,enthusiastic, involved supervisor and working
and satisfied with his work, environment, she is ready to go
therefore he has a habit of beyond her job role and do what
sharing the problems with his the supervisor guides her to do
team and willing to go beyond and also this makes her
his job role. comfortable in conveying any
disapproval without any fear

yes, I am willing to go beyond

when something goes wrong,
my job role, as, if the supervisor
instead of hiding, we have a
asks us to do something, we will
habit of sharing, that boss might
do it surely. I can do any work
come up with a solution, we are
given by him. Eg: arranging
4 people in a team, we keep on
 WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP
12
sharing, when customer is party in the branch, taking care
unhappy and angry, we together of the store-room etc.
find a solution.
yes, I am allowed to convey my
I am willing to go beyond my disapproval in things without
job role. There is MAD day in any fear.
office, dedicated for social
service happens in feb once in a
year. You nominate your name,
teaching children in slums,
cleanliness drive etc.

Leader behavior the subject has a very positive the subject has a very positive
image about his leader, they image about her leader, as he
interact daily, together find a motivates her to excel, provides
solution, his leader shows his her with customers when she has
good work to higher bosses and problem in making her income,
involves him fully in decision helps in resolving workplace
making. conflicts, rewards her
contributions, though he dont
I almost interact daily with my
involve her much in decision
manager, he keeps on advising,
making.
evaluating, praising (when
things go well) he motivates me to excel at
work
when something goes wrong,
we have a habit of sharing and last month I had problem in
together finding a solution making my income, so he
provided me with two
my supervisor 100% involves
customers, that approach to
me in every decision making
them and raise relationship with
 WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP
13
he motivates us to excel at them, and then there income will
work, whenever, there is visit of come to you, thus he contributed
higher bosses, he tries to show in my effective functioning.
our good work to them, which
my supervisor dont involve me
motivates us to do a lot more
much in decision making.
better
he helps in resolving conflicts
conveying our disapproval is a
at workplace
controversial thing, it hardly
happens. On the face you cannot he recognize and reward my
say, but we always discuss with contributions.
boss

Impact of leadership good bond with supervisor, the good bond with the supervisor,
behavior on Engagement subject shares the problem and the subject is willing to go
not hide it, and when the boss beyond her job role, finds her
praises him in front of higher work inspiring and challenging,
bosses, it motivates him to do a feels enthusiastic about coming
lot more better. And whenever to work and feels comfortable in
there is some issue, he discuss it conveying her disapproval.
with boss.
I am allowed to convey my
when something goes wrong, disapproval without any fear
instead of hiding, we have a
I am willing to go beyond my
habit of sharing and together
job role and do what my
finding a solution
supervisor asks me to do
he motivates us to excel at
I find my work inspiring and
work, whenever, there is visit of
challenging as satisfying the
higher bosses, he tries to show
customer is a very big
our good work to them, which
WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP
14
motivates us to do a lot more challenge
better
these days I feel enthusiastic
conveying our disapproval is a about coming to work
controversial thing, it hardly
happens. On the face you cannot
say, but we always discuss with
boss

Discussion

The objective of the research is to study the relationship between work engagement and
leadership, to examine differences between public and private sector bank employees on work
engagement and leadership styles, and also to qualitatively understand the constructs of work
engagement and leadership based on qualitative data obtained from two employees.

The present study was carried out in banking sector (private and public). Every researcher
went to a public or a private bank in a group of 2-5 and collected their respective data from one
male and one female employee. The researchers chose banking sector because it is a fast-
growing industry and everyone can access a bank because there are numerous bank across cities.
Also, the banking sector in India is on a rise these days with many banks opening up their
branches in India which has led to growth in employment opportunities and have manifestation
on engagement of the employees towards an organization. Thus, work engagement is an issue of
utmost importance.

We as a group had chosen to go to a private sector bank, so we went to HDFC because it

is a reputed organization. HDFC Bank Limited is an Indian banking and financial services
company headquartered in Mumbai, Maharashtra. Incorporated in 1994, it is the fifth largest
WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP
15
bank in India as measured by assets. Few policies of HDFC bank are, HDFC Life Cancer Care,
HDFC SL Young Star Super Premium, HDFC Life Pension Super Plus, HDFC Life Super
Savings Plan, HDFC Life Smart Woman Plan etc. The profile of the participants of my research
are:

The first participant was male, who is 40 years old and is an MBA. His positon in the
current organization is BOM- Senior Manager, and tenure in the organization is more than 10
years and in the present designation, it is 1 year+. During interaction, he was found to be very
calm, positive and highly motivated toward his work. The second participant was female named,
who is 33 years old and has done B.Com. Her position in the current organization is Personal
Banker, and tenure in the organization is 6 years and in the present designation, it is is 3 years.
During interaction, she was found to be motivated towards her work but at the same time wanted
more growth from the organization.

From Table 1, which is Raw Score and percentile ranks obtained by the two participants
on MLQ, it was found that, for the male participant, in the first style of leadership, i.e.
transformational leadership which has 5 dimensions, his percentile rank (PR) on the 1 st
dimension IA (idealized attributes) is 95, which shows that his leader largely instills pride in
others for being associated with him and also can go beyond self-interest for the good of the
group. On the 2nd dimension IB (idealized behaviors) his PR is 80, which shows that his leader
emphasizes the importance of having a collective sense of mission and have a sense of purpose
in his work. On the 3rd dimension IM (inspirational motivation) his PR is 95, which shows that
his leader talks optimistically about the future and express confidence that goals will be
achieved. On the 4th dimension IS (intellectual stimulation) his PR is 90, which shows that his
leader seeks differing perspectives when solving problems and suggest new ways of looking to
complete assignments. On the 5th dimension IC (individual consideration) his PR is 60, which
shows that his leader tries to spend time in teaching and coaching his juniors. In the 2nd type of
leadership which is transactional leadership which has 2 dimensions, his PR on the 1st dimension
CR (contingent reward) is 95, which shows that his leader clarifies expectations and offers
recognition when goals are achieved and provide others with assistance in exchange for their
efforts. On the 2nd dimension MBEA (management-by-exception) his PR is 95, which shows that
he concentrates full attention on dealing with mistakes, complaints and failures. In the 3 rd type of
WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP
16
leadership, i.e. passive avoidant which has 2 dimensions, his PR on the 1st dimension MBEP
(management by exception: passive) is 70, which shows that he sometimes fails to find solution,
until problem become serious. On the 2nd dimension LF (laissez-faire), his PR is 20, which
shows that he is not absent when needed. In the 3rd type, which is outcome leadership which has
3 dimensions, his PR on 1st aspect EE (extra effort) is 90, which shows he get others to do more
than they are expected to do and heightens others desire to succeed. On the 2nd aspect EFF
(effectiveness) his PR is 95, which shows that his leader is effective in representing their group
to higher authority. On the 3rd aspect SAT (satisfaction with the leadership) his PR is 80, which
shows that his leader works with others in a satisfactory way.

For the female participant, in the first style of leadership, i.e. transformational leadership
which has 5 dimensions, her percentile rank (PR) on the 1st dimension IA (idealized attributes) is
30, which shows that 30 percent of the total frequency scored below her on this dimension and
that her leader does not much go beyond his self-interest for the good of the group. On the 2nd
dimension IB (idealized behaviors) her PR is 50, which shows that her leader gives only average
importance to having a collective sense of mission. On the 3rd dimension IM (inspirational
motivation) her PR is 60, which shows that the leader sometimes expresses confidence that goals
will be achieved. On the 4th dimension IS (intellectual stimulation) her PR is 70, which shows
that the leader seeks differing perspectives when solving problems. On the 5th dimension IC
(individual consideration) her PR is 30, which shows that the leader does not much spend time in
teaching and coaching his juniors. In the 2nd type of leadership which is transactional leadership
which has 2 dimensions, his PR on the 1st dimension CR (contingent reward) is 40, which shows
that her leader only sometimes provide others with assistance in exchange for their efforts. On
the 2nd dimension MBEA (management-by-exception) PR is 90, which shows that the leader
concentrates full attention on dealing with mistakes, complaints and failures. In the 3rd type of
leadership, i.e. passive avoidant which has 2 dimensions, his PR on the 1st dimension MBEP
(management by exception: passive) is 30, which shows that he only sometimes fails to find
solution, until problem become serious. On the 2nd dimension LF (laissez-faire), his PR is 30,
which shows that he is not absent when needed. In the 3rd type, which is outcome leadership
which has 3 dimensions, his PR on 1st aspect EE (extra effort) is 70, which shows he get others
to do more than they are expected to do. On the 2nd aspect EFF (effectiveness) her PR is 50,
WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP
17
which shows that the leader is sometimes effective in meeting job-related needs. On the 3rd
aspect SAT (satisfaction with the leadership) PR is 80, which shows that her leader works with
others in a satisfactory way.

From Table 2, which is Raw Score and Descriptive categories obtained by two
participants on Work Engagement Scale, it was found that the male participant is high on vigor
(4.83) and dedication (5.4) and average on absorption (4.16). Those who score high on vigor
usually have much energy, zest and stamina when working. Those who score high on dedication
strongly identify with their work because it is experienced as meaningful, inspiring, and
challenging. Besides, they usually feel enthusiastic and proud about their work. Those who score
high on absorption feel that they usually are happily engrossed in their work, they feel immersed
by their work and have difficulties detaching from it because it carries them away. As a
consequence, everything else around is forgotten and time seems to fly. But, as the participant
has scored average on absorption, it shows that though he likes his work but does not get so
immersed in it as though he has forgotten the sense of time.

Also, from table 2, we came to understand that the female participant is average in vigor
(3.66), dedication (3.4) and absorption (3.33). This shows that, though she likes her working
environment and is happy with her current supervisor but doesnt have high zest towards her
work, as she scored average on vigor dimension. Also, though she is willing to go beyond her job
role for the company, she is not very enthusiastic and proud of her work, as she scored average
on dedication dimension. Also, average score on absorption means she is not very much
immersed in work as though she has forgotten the sense of time.

After collecting data individually, it was pooled with the total class data to make the sample
(n= 90). This was done to test the following hypotheses.

Hypothesis 1: Transformational leadership is positively correlated with employees work

engagement and other outcome variables.

We can see from Table 4 that there is a correlation of .125 between transformational
leadership and work engagement (p=.241). Hence, it is not a significant relationship. The
correlation between transformational leadership and outcomes of leadership is .540 which is
significant at 0.01 level. The correlations with vigor is .230 and the level of significance between
WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP
18
the two is .029 i.e. (<.05) which indicates that there is a significant positive correlation between
transformational leadership and vigor. Further, the correlation with dedication is .209 and the
level of significance between the two is .048 i.e. (<.05) which indicates that there is a significant
positive correlation between TR and dedication. Finally, the correlation between
transformational leadership and absorption is .108, which is not a significant relationship. Hence,
we can say that the above hypothesis is confirmed, as there is a positive correlation between
transformational leadership and the dimensions of vigor and dedication, and outcomes of
leadership.

Bass (1985) described the transformational leaders as those who raise associates level
of awareness of the importance of achieving valued outcomes and the strategies for reaching
them; encourage associates to transcend their self-interest for the sake of the team, organization,
or larger policy; develop associates needs to higher levels in such areas as achievement,
autonomy, and affiliation, which can be both work related and not work related. Since
transformational leaders are high on factors such as idealized influence, individual consideration,
motivation as well as stimulation, they tend to create employees who are more engaged in their
work and thus improve their performance. Breevaart, Bakker, Hetland (2014) examined the daily
inuence of transformational leadership, contingent reward, and active management-by-
exception (MBEactive) on followers daily work engagement. As predicted, transformational
leadership and contingent reward contributed to a more favourable work environment (more
autonomy and support), while MBE (management-by-exception) active resulted in a less
favourable work environment (less autonomy) for the cadets. This study highlights the
importance of daily leadership for followers daily work engagement.

Hypothesis 2: Transactional leadership is positively correlated with employees work

engagement and other outcome variables, though not as strongly as transformational leadership.

Table 4 shows a positive correlation of 0.593 between transactional leadership and

outcomes of leadership. This correlation is significant at the 0.01 level. A transformational leader
differs from the transactional one by attempting to develop their associates needs from lower to
higher levels of maturity. Since, the transactional leadership is similar to a give and take
WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP
19
relationship; it would not be as effective as transformational leadership which aims at the growth
of the employees and turning them into subsequent leaders. It is also positively correlated with
dedication and the correlation coefficient is 0.216 and the level of significance between the two
is .041 (<.05). Metzler (2006) found that both transformational and transactional leadership
positively predicted employee vigor, dedication and absorption, with transformational leadership
possessing greater predictive strength.

Hypothesis 3: Passive-avoidant leadership is negatively correlated with employees work

engagement and other outcome variables.
Table 4 proves that passive avoidant leadership is negatively correlated with all outcome
variables including outcomes of leadership, dedication, vigor, absorption and work engagement.
It shows a correlation of -0.233 with vigor which is significant at the 0.01 level. Also, passive
avoidant leadership has a negative though insignificant correlation with outcomes of leadership,
dedication, absorption and work engagement. Since passive avoidant leaders are not present and
show negligible interest in the employee, they avoid specifying agreements, clarifying
expectations, and providing goals and standards to be achieved by followers, thus the level of
work engagement of the employee drastically reduces. Skogstad, Einarsen, Torsheim, Aasland,
and Hetland (2007)found that this leaderless leadership style was positively associated with job
stressors such as role ambiguity, role conflict and conflict with co-workers, while Hauge,
Skogstad, and Einarsen (2007) supported its positive relationship with bullying at work.

Hypothesis 4: Leadership styles differ across public and private sector banks.

Table 5 shows the differences in the different styles of leadership across private and public
banks. Transactional leadership is greater in the private banks (M=2.81) than in the public
banks(M= 2.48) with (t= -2.333) which is significant at 0.05 level. This can be because in private
banks performance based advancement is present, and therefore leader plays role in rewarding
employees. And in public banks, career progression is more a function of tenure and experience
in the bank rather than based on performance, hence the leader does not play an important role in
setting goals, doing performance appraisals and hence in private sector there is more use of
transactional style than in public banks.
WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP
20
Passive avoidant leadership is greater in public banks (M= 1.24) than in private banks
(M=0.94) with (t= 1.989) which is significant at 0.05 level. This can be because, as leaders in
public banks have minimum role in the career progression of the employees, so over a period of
time they are more likely to become passive by avoiding making decisions and responding to
employees.

Demeter and apardel (2013) did a comparison between the private and public leadership.
They presented the differences between private and public managers that lead to different
leadership styles and behaviours. They argued that the differences are because of different
internal and external factors that influence and impact the managerial competences and the
performance management of an organizational. The managerial job is very complex, ambiguous,
with less autonomy and with a strong political influence on the policy making process in the
public organizations that conducts to a directive leadership style. On the other hand, private
organizations develop a more participatory style based on the fact that the jobs are more clearly
defined, more autonomous, flexible and the decision making process is a not so highly
influenced by the stakeholders.

Hypothesis 5: Employees work engagement differs across public and private sector banks.

Table 5 shows the difference in the level of work engagement of employees across public
and private banks. The total work engagement is higher in private banks (M=4.322) than in
public banks (M=4.239). The mean scores are slightly higher for the private sector on vigour,
dedication and outcomes of leadership. However, the t values of work engagement have been
found to be insignificant and hence the hypothesis has not been confirmed. So we can say that
work engagement, though dependent on the organisational variables, also depends on personal
variables outside of organisation. Soieb, Othman & DSilva1 (2013) studied employee
engagement which has become a topic that keeps coming up and often debated by the top
management particularly in the public sector agencies due to the differences in the work and
leadership styles, commitment and job performances exhibited by the new officers that seem to
generate mix perceptions and, to some extent, disrupt the good relationship between them and
senior officers thus destabilizing the organizations. Although this scenario is particularly known
WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP
21
to occur in the public sector, adequate research on employee engagement that is heavily
influenced by the styles of leadership and organizational citizenship behavior are poorly
executed.

The researcher also studied qualitatively, the construct of Work Engagement and
leadership based on the data (interview) from two employees. Table 6 contains the Analysis of
qualitative data of both male and female employee through the process of directed content
analysis. For the male participant, from the first aspect of experience of work engagement, we
came to understand that he is very engaged in his work as according to him there is no end to
learning, and he feels enthusiastic about coming to work and has a good work-life balance. For
him, everyday is a challenge and one has to be a good listener to understand their customers.
And also he wants that if customers come with problems, hearing should be there. And he also
likes his superiors approach towards his work. From the second aspect of Antecedents of Work
Engagement, we came to understand that good working environment, opportunities for personal
and professional growth, being friendly and kind to employees and helping them shows his good
engagement towards his work. From the third aspect of Consequence of Work Engagement, we
came to understand that as he is very passionate, enthusiastic, involved and satisfied with his
work, therefore he has a habit of sharing the problems with his team and willing to go beyond his
job role. From the fourth aspect of Leader behavior, we came to understand that he has a very
positive image about his leader, they interact daily, together find a solution, his leader shows his
good work to higher bosses and involves him fully in decision making. From the fifth aspect of
Impact of leadership behavior on Engagement, we came to understand that due to good bond
with supervisor, he shares the problem with the supervisor and not hide it, and when the boss
praises him in front of higher bosses, it motivates him to do a lot more better. And whenever
there is some issue, he discuss it with boss.
For the female participant, from the first aspect of experience of work engagement, we
came to understand that she feels enthusiastic about coming to work due to the good supervisor.
She finds her work challenging and inspiring as she can go at higher level for solving the
customer problems. She also thinks that employees should have good knowledge of their
products. From the second aspect of Antecedents of Work Engagement, we came to understand
that factors like good working environment, chances to learn new things, good relationship with
WORK ENGAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP
22
colleagues, manager having understanding and friendly nature leads to good engagement of her
towards work. From the third aspect of Consequence of Work Engagement, we came to
understand that as she is happy with her supervisor and working environment, she is ready to go
beyond her job role and do what the supervisor guides her to do and also this makes her
comfortable in conveying any disapproval at workplace without any fear. From the fourth aspect
of Leader behavior, we came to understand that she has a very positive image about her leader,
as he motivates her to excel, provides her with customers when she has problem in making her
income, helps in resolving workplace conflicts, rewards her contributions, though he dont
involve her much in decision making. From the fifth aspect of Impact of leadership behavior on
Engagement, we came to understand that due to good bond with the supervisor, the subject is
willing to go beyond her job role, finds her work inspiring and challenging, feels enthusiastic
about coming to work and feels comfortable in conveying her disapproval.

Limitations and implications

Many researchers were not allowed to record the interview, hence they may have lose out
some information that was shared by the participant during the interview. It may be possible that
some participants have given socially desirable answers. A major limitation in the study was
found in the use of MLQ. In complete MLQ form, supervisors fill out a rater form also, which
allows them to rate themselves on the various leadership behaviors. These ratings can then be
compared to the ratings of their subordinates. This was not conducted in the present study.

The present research has important implications for leadership research and real world
organizations. The study showed that different leadership styles are correlated employee
engagement. Transformational leadership particularly, has the greatest correlation employee
dedication and vigor. Hence this research has reinforced the importance of transformational
leadership behaviours to subordinates and to organizations.