Ten C's Leadership Practices Impacting Employee Engagement:

A Study of Hotel and Tourism Industry*

Anu Singh Lather V.K. Jain

Professor and Director International Affairs Additional Director General,
Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Doordarshan, Prasar Bharti
Dwarka, Delhi, India Government of India
anusinghlather@gmail.com jain15vinod@gmail.com

Abstract
There has been much debate on leaders' role in determining the employee engagement
in organizations. Though there were studies focusing on different leadership styles and
engagement, there is dearth of studies on specific leadership practice and its linkage with
employee enagement. Similarly, there are no studies to map leadership and employee engagement
against socio- demographic profile of the employees. The present study is conducted to map the
effect of specific leadership practices on employee engagement with respect to the socio-
demographic profile of employees. The study is made in the hotel and tourism industry with a
sample of 100 employees selected using stratified random sampling. The results show that,
overall, employees feel more engaged when leaders practice democratic control. Males prefer
only democratic control while females want control as well as leader's focus on their career
development. Age wise, employees below 35 years want leaders to focus on their career while
employees aged above 35 years want control from their leaders. The study also shows the
leadership practices and their relationship with employee engagement in different sectors and
groups, with different years of experience, and at different levels of management.

Keywords: Leadership practices, Employee engagement, Service industry, Level of management

Introduction
The worlds top-performing organizations understand that employee engagement
is a force that drives business outcomes. It is a strategic foundation for the way they do
business. Organizations that have optimized engagement have 2.6 times growth in the
earnings per share (EPS) compared to organizations with lower engagement in the same
industry.
Engagement at work was conceptualized by Kahn, (1990) as the harnessing of
organizational members selves to their work roles. In engagement, people employ and
express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally during role performances.
In the past five years quantitative research studies have provided HR with a
compelling business case regarding the upside and the downside of an unengaged workforce,

*Received March 17, 2015; Revised July 17, 2015

60 Vilakshan, XIMB Journal of Management, Vol.12 (II), September, 2015

hard data linking an engaged workforce with increased profitability and an unengaged
workforce with decreased profitability with differential profit being 20 to 28 percent was
reported by Conference Board (2006). A study by Serota Consulting, (2005) of 28
multinational companies found that the share prices of organizations with highly engaged
employees rose by an average of 16 percent compared with an industry average of 6
percent (Esty & Gewirtz, 2008).
There are also costs associated with a disengaged workforce. Disengagement
has been found to cost between 243 to 270 billion dollars due to low productivity of this
group according to a 2003 Gallup poll. In one 2003 study by ISR, companies with low
levels of employee engagement found that their net profit fell by 1.38 percent and operating
margin fell by 2.01 percent over a three year period. Conversely, companies with high
levels of engagement found that their operating margins rose by 3.74 percent over a three
year period (Esty & Gewirtz, 2008).
Employee Engagement is definitely a fuel that drives the organization.
Organizations can build a culture of engagement by having two-way communication,
clear business goals, and a solid set of metrics for tracking all important steps in building
a culture of engagement (Blessing White, 2013). This culture can only be possible by
having leaders who can help cascade the vision and inspire others to exceptional
performance. In fact leadership and engagement are considered to be the two sides of
a coin (Blessing White, 2013). India is facing employee engagement challenges (Jha,
2015). Only 9 % of Indias workers are engaged in their jobs, while 31% are actively
disengaged Kohli (2014). Thirty two percent of employed Indians are actively disengaged
and 60 percent are not engaged. These workers are emotionally disconnected from
their workplaces (Kohli & Grover, 2013).
Bhatnagar (2007) in a study of Indian IT/ITES organizations found that isolated
employee engagement efforts may lead to high retention but for a limited period. Further,
without adequate leadership the results will be short-lived. On the other hand, focusing
only on leadership development will probably end into a less engaged workforce.
Aon Hewitt (2012) conducted an analysis of companies with strong financial
results. The analysis shows that one distinguishing feature of these companies is the
quality of their senior management. They found that senior managers levels of engagement
were high and their ability to engage others, particularly those in middle management,
was strong. In short, engagement starts at the top. Organizations cannot engage the
hearts and minds of their employees without engaging senior leadership because they are
the force who, by communicating frequently and honestly, clearly charting the course for
the organization and letting employees know what is required of them to help make the
business successful, can improve the employee engagement level. Cross et al (2012) in
their work on how top organizations leverage networks to drive employee engagement
argues that leaders who rely on traditional approaches for motivating employees miss a
crucial fact of how people feel at work and thus how they perform is driven only partially
 Lather and Jain , Ten C's Leadership Practices Impacting ...
61

by roles and reward systems. Positive interactions with workers have shown to improve
emotional, physical, and cognitive well-being. Seijts and Dan Crim (2006) mentions that
practitioners and academics have argued that an engaged workforce can create
competitive advantage and also propose that it is imperative for leaders to identify the
level of engagement in their organization and implement behavioral strategies that will
facilitate full engagement. In clear terms, they describe how leaders can do that. How
can leaders engage employees heads, hearts, and hands? Seijts and Dan Crim suggest
that this can be done through ten Cs, which are
y Connect: Leaders must show that they value employees.
y Career: Leaders should provide challenging and meaningful work with opportunities
for career advancement.
y Clarity: Leaders must communicate a clear vision.
y Convey: Leaders clarify their expectations about employees and provide feedback
on their functioning in the organization.
y Congratulate: Leaders must provide praises for the good work done.
y Contribute: People want to know that their input matters and that they are contributing
to the organizations success in a meaningful way.
y Control: Employees value control over the flow and pace of their jobs and leaders
can create opportunities for employees to exercise this control.
y Collaborate: Studies show that, when employees work in teams and have the trust
and cooperation of their team members, they outperform individuals and teams
which lack good relationships.
y Credibility: Leaders should strive to maintain a companys reputation and
demonstrate high ethical standards.
y Confidence: Good leaders help create confidence in a company by being exemplars
of high ethical and performance standards.
Walsh (2012) suggests that to create actively engaged workforce, organizations
must focus on certain core principles to develop their leaders who in turn develop the
workforce. To engage employees, a leader must know the motives and expectations and
must link them in multiple directions. These motives are linked to expectations of individuals
who consciously or sub-consciously seek from their organization through leader behaviors
like Clarity (being clear about the strategy and my role in helping to achieve it), Connectivity
(belonging and being included), Authority (having an appropriate level of freedom to achieve
results), Capability (being appropriately challenged and able to develop my capabilities
further), and Competency (being good or best at what one does). He suggested ten
strategies to engage employees actively which includes meeting employee regularly and
openly discussing the business strategies and goals, encouraging employees to discuss
their concerns and fears, keeping communication lines open and honest, encouraging
employees to question, setting up weekly informal meetings to discuss formal and informal
issues, clarifying goals constantly, aligning roles to skills, developing key milestones,
62 Vilakshan, XIMB Journal of Management, Vol.12 (II), September, 2015

encouraging participation, and most importantly discussing realistic career options and
desiging training accordingly.

Literature Review
Though employee engagement is a relatively new area of research, its relevance
and need has led to many research studies in a short time. The present literature review,
focuses only on empirical studies conducted in the last five-six years.
Zhang et al (2014) investigated whether the direct supervisors leadership style
affects employee engagement using Averys classical, transactional, visionary, and organic
leadership paradigms as the theoretical framework. The study was conducted on 439
retail sales assistants in Sydney, Australia. Results showed that the visionary and organic
paradigms are likely to enhance employee engagement, whereas classical and transactional
styles negatively affect employee engagement. The findings of the study suggest that
direct supervisors should be encouraged to use visionary and/or organic leadership wherever
possible to drive employee engagement.
Khuong and Yen (2014) investigated the effect of leadership styles on employee
engagement and mediation effect of employee sociability in Binh Duong City. The study
used sample of 269 office employees of five dominant industries of the city. The findings
indicated that ethical leadership, employee sociability and visionary leadership approach
was positively correlated to employee engagement while transactional leadership was
negatively correlated with employee engagement. Besides, the study also found that ethical
leadership and visionary leadership positively affected employee sociability.
Wells (2013) reported results from the survey conducted on 1500 employees and
found that employees across all career fields and at all levels were most engaged when
their leaders gave performance based goals, directions to completing tasks, setting standards
to judge performance, provide feedback, monitor performance optimally, seek employees
opinions, give autonomy to make decisions and create solutions, and are available for
questions. Wells further reported that employees were found to be less engaged if leaders
adopted micromanagement leadership style in terms of excessive supervision, monitoring,
and excessive feedback. Employees also felt less engaged when leaders were adopting
hands-off leadership style i.e. the lazziez faire style of leadership.
Menguc et al (2013) studied the antecedents and consequences of service
employee engagement based on the Job Demand-Resource (JD-R) model. The model
examines the main effect of resources (autonomy, feedback, and support) and their
interactions on engagement. The model also explored the mediating role of engagement
in the relationship between resources and customers perceived level of service and
employee performance. The data were collected from 482 service employees and
customers from 66 retail stores and analyzed using multilevel modeling. The results of the
study revealed that supervisory feedback is positively related to engagement while
supervisory support is not. More engagement is related to more positive service employee
 Lather and Jain , Ten C's Leadership Practices Impacting ...
63

performance. Also, the engagement was found to be a full mediator between supervisory
feedback and service employee performance.
Bouffard (2012) argued that the key to engaging the employees is to understand
how they feel about the company, culture and business practices. Also equally important
is the perception of employees towards management effectiveness. He suggested ten
critical areas where employees feelings and perceptions can derail them from engagement
and leaders need to focus to offset disengagement. Bouffard named them as leadership
basics to engage employees. These are practicing values, implementing the vision of the
organization, accountability at all levels, discouraging competition, focusing on effectiveness
instead of efficiency, cultivating collaboration, practicing servant leadership, continuous
improvement initiatives, displaying emotionally and socially intelligent behaviors, and open
door policy. Bouffard recommends that mastering these basics of good leadership will
set the stage for an engaged workforce.
Colbert (2012) conducted a study to understand leadership styles and behaviors
that drive employee engagement. Transformational, authentic, and transactional leadership
styles were examined. The results of the study signify that leadership style is not a predictor
of engagement. However, certain leadership behaviors have a strong impact on employee
engagement. These behaviors are: (a) being transparent; (b) enrolling employees in change
activities; (c) involving employees; (d) connecting the dots for employees; and (e) rewarding
and recognizing employees.
Waqas Raja (2012) in his study of 150 respondents from Pakistani service sector
firms to understand the impact of transformational leadership on work engagement found
that inspirational motivation, idealized influence, individual consideration and intellectual
stimulation are practiced by the managers it leads to higher employee work engagement.
Landman (2012) conducted a study to understand the relationships between perceived
leader behavior, employee engagement, job characteristics and employee intention to
quit. A non-experimental quantitative research design was applied using a sample of
managers in a local JSE-listed manufacturing organization (n = 185). The results unveiled
significant positive relationships between transformational leadership and employee
engagement, the motivating potential of a job and employee engagement, and
transformational leadership and the motivating potential of a job. Also significant negative
relationships were reported between transformational leadership and intention to quit,
and employee engagement and intention to quit. The mediating effects of employee
engagement, as measured using Sobels test, confirmed engagement to be a mediator of
the relationship between transformational leadership and intention to quit.
Tims et al (2011) in a diary study investigated whether and how supervisors
leadership style influences followers daily work engagement. They assumed that
transformational leadership style enhances employees work engagement. Forty two
employees filled a questionnaire and were subjected to a diary survey for five consecutive
days. Multilevel analysis was applied and they found partial support to their assumption.
64 Vilakshan, XIMB Journal of Management, Vol.12 (II), September, 2015

Daily transformational leadership related positively to employees daily engagement, and

day-levels of optimism fully mediated this relationship. However, daily self-efficacy did
not act as a mediator. These findings expand theory and previous research by revealing
the role of transformational leaders in fostering employee work engagement. A research
was conducted by Xu and Thomas (2011) with a large New Zealand insurance organization,
using data from direct reports. First of all a pilot study was conducted (N= 236) to factor
analyze JRA 360-degree feedback instrument. Finally a linkage analysis (N= 178) was
conducted to find out the relationship between the leadership factors and employee
engagement measure. The three of the leadership factors, though overlapping found related
to engagement were supports team, performs effectively, and displays integrity.
Salanova et al (2011) conducted a study of 280 nurses from a large Portuguese
hospital working in different health services. The purpose of the study was to understand
the linking role of transformational leadership on nurses extra- role performance and
whether self efficacy and work engagement mediate this relationship. Analysis of the
data revealed a full mediation model in which transformational leadership explained extra-
role performance through self-efficacy and work engagement. A direct relationship
between transformational leadership and work engagement was also found. Javier (2011)
conducted doctoral research with a purpose to determine to what extent managers
leadership style impacts employee engagement levels. The research was conducted by
using Bass and Avolios Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire and Q12 Meta analysis by
Harter, Schmidt, Killham, and Asplund (2006) on employee engagement. Study revealed
that there was a direct positive relationship between transformational leadership style
and overall employee engagement and there was a direct positive association between
the transformational leadership style and the management support and teamwork sub
dimensions of engagement. However no relationship was found between transactional
leadership and employee engagement.
Padmanathan (2010) undertook a study with the objective to examine the
relationship between transformational and transactional leadership styles on employee
engagement at Intel Malaysia. The study examines the predictive ability of leadership
styles to predict aspects of employee engagement. The population for this study was the
exempt level of the FES Organization at lntel Penang. The analysis of the study found
that both transformational and transactional leadership positively predicted employee
engagement, where transactional show more effect on employee engagement compared
to transformational leadership.
Giallonardo et al (2010) conducted a study to examine the relationships between
new graduate nurses perceptions of preceptor authentic leadership, work engagement
and job satisfaction. The sample was 170 registered nurses with experience of less than
three years, and was working in acute care setting. Hierarchical multiple regression was
applied and the results demonstrated that 20% of the variance in job satisfaction was
explained by authentic leadership and work engagement. Work engagement was also
found to partially mediate the relationship between authentic leadership of preceptors and
 Lather and Jain , Ten C's Leadership Practices Impacting ...
65

engagement of new graduate nurses. Marquard (2010) conducted a study to examine the
relationship between leadership behaviors manifest in supervisory and leadership
competencies and the impact of those demonstrable behaviors on employee perceptions
associated with engagement. The study was conducted on the engineering executives of
a large multinational company. The results of the study indicated that leadership
competencies of developing others, demonstrating passion, and leading change are
significantly positively correlated with employee perceptions associated with engagement.

Stroud (2009) investigated the relationship between senior leadership competence

and employee engagement. The study used Fortune 500 multinational corporations
leadership competency model, along with multi-rater feedback and employee engagement
instruments. The results demonstrated that integrity, collaboration and teaming are the
abilities in senior leaders having positive relationships with employee engagement.
However, self-awareness and the ability of senior leaders to adapt were not found to be
significantly related with employee engagement. The study also highlighted the concern
that the relationship between senior leadership abilities and employee engagement existed
partly because engaged employees gave positive ratings and less engaged employees
gave negative ratings of their leaders.

Papalexandris and Galanaki (2008) conducted a study on CEOs, entrepreneurs

and their subordinates to see the impact of leadership on employee engagement. The
study revealed two leadership dimensions to be most influential for engagement. These
two dimensions are good manager/mentor (e.g. follower confident, power sharing,
communicator, role clarifying) and articulating vision (e.g. inspirational, visionary, decisive,
team oriented). Macey and Schneider (2008) reported adaptivity and proactivity
encouraged through intellectual stimulation by leaders as sources of engagement.
Lockwood (2008) conducted a quantitative and descriptive correlational study to examine
the relationship between employee self-efficacy, perceived supervisory leadership style
and employee engagement in a blue-collar workforce. The results revealed a moderately
positive relationship between the perceived transformational leadership style of supervisors
and employee engagement levels and a moderately negative relationship between a
perceived laissez-faire leadership style and subordinate engagement levels.

Studies conducted in Indian organizations by various researchers show that

involvement in decision making (Pati & Kumar, 2011; Desai et al, 2010),expectation
management (Singh et al, online), safe and cooperative environment (Singh & Panda,
online), satisfactory work environment, opportunities to grow (Pandey & David, 2013)
caring and valuing employee, free and frank communication with immediate supervisor,
empathetic attitude of the latter towards the former, recognition of ones contributions
towards the organizational goals (Desai et al, 2010; Balakrishnan et al, 2013), team work
and role clarity (Balakrishnan et al, 2013) improved employee engagement.
66 Vilakshan, XIMB Journal of Management, Vol.12 (II), September, 2015

Research Gap
The extensive review of literature represented that whatever studies are done
with respect to linking leadership and employee engagement, most of them are focused
on leadership styles and employee engagement. There is dearth of studies focused on
specific leadership practices and their relation with employee engagement especially in
service sector where employees are the face of the organizations who pull in or push out
customers. Also there are no studies so far describing the role of socio demographic
factors like gender, age, experience, educational and socio economic background etc in
the relationship between leadership strategies and employee engagement. Accordingly
the present study aims to understand the relationship between the specific leadership
practices and employee engagement and role of socio demographic factors in this
relationship amongst the hospitality and tourism sector employees in national capital region
of India which is a prime hub of tourists and business visitors nationally and internationally.

Objective of the Study

The main objective of the study is to understand the relationship between the ten
specific practices of leadership and employee engagement in public and private sector
hospitality and tourism organizations across different age groups, gender, marital status,
work experience, level of management, socio economic status, family type, educational
qualifications, schooling, area of location, and income groups.

Research Methodology
Research Design
A 2X3 factorial design with unequal numbers was planned for the study as shown below.

Sample
The total sample consisted of 100 employees, out of which 50 were from Public Sector,
working in hospitality and tourism industry located in Delhi and National Capital Region
(NCR). The rest 50 were Private sector employees working in hospitality and tourism
 Lather and Jain , Ten C's Leadership Practices Impacting ...
67

industry in the same region. The study used stratified random sampling and the sample
profile is given below in Table-1.
Table 1: Respondents Profile (N=100)
Gender Male Female
N 55 45
Sector Public Private
N 50 50
Years of Experience 0-5 years 6-10 years 11-20 years 21+ years
N 33 18 25 24
Level of Management Entry Level Middle Level Top Level
N 50 35 15

Survey Instruments
1. Leadership Practices Questionnaire: To measure leadership strategies, a
questionnaire was designed on the ten Cs suggested by Seijts and Dan Crim (2006).
The questionnaire consisted of 49 items on 5 point likert scale. The validity of the
question was established by confirmatory factor analysis. The Cronbach Alpha
reliability score for each construct was calculated. The reliability score of various
dimensions are as for Connect (.904), Career (.863), Clarity (.887), Convey (.881),
Congratulate (.887), Contribute (.899), Control (.906), Collaborate (.925), Credibility
(.912), and for Confidence (.835).
2. Employee Engagement Scale: A 26-item questionnaire was constructed to
measure employee engagement. Six dimensions of employee engagement were
synthesized based on extensive literature review. These dimensions were
organizational commitment, job satisfaction, advocate, intent to stay, pride and
emotional connect. The validity of the questionnaire was established by confirmatory
factor analysis. The cronbach alpha reliability score of various dimensions are: Job
Satisfaction (.870), Organizational Commitment (.858), Advocate (.831), Pride
(.891), Intent to Stay (.806), and Emotional Connect (.784).
Results and Discussion
Correlation coefficients were calculated for leadership practices and employee
engagement of the overall sample. The results reveal significant positive correlation
between employee engagement and all the ten leadership practices i.e. connect, career,
clarity, convey, congratulate, contribute, control, collaborate, credibility and confidence
(Table 2). Then step wise regression was applied to understand which all leadership
practices created an impact on employee engagement. The results show (Table 3) that it
is only control and clarity that makes a difference in employee engagement. Out of the
two, control contributes 46.6% (Adjusted R2= .466) change in employee engagement
while clarity only contributes 2.1% (Adjusted R2= .021) change in employee engagement.
Rest of the leadership practices do not effect employee engagement. The results indicate
68 Vilakshan, XIMB Journal of Management, Vol.12 (II), September, 2015

that overall employees prefer a democratic or servent leadership where they want their
leader to seek their opinions, understand their individual needs and act as a facilitator and
yet keep an eye on flow and pace of work.
Table 2: Correlatons of Leadership Practices with Employee Engagement
Leadership Practices Pearsons Correlation Significance
Employee Engagement
1 Connect .588 .000
2 Career .598 .000
3 Clarity .629 .000
4 Convey .586 .000
5 Congratulate .602 .000
6 Contribute .600 .000
7 Control .686 .000
8 Collaborate .580 .000
9 Credibility .606 .000
10 Confidence .559 .000

The employee engagement scores were further regressed genderwise on leadership

practices. The results indicate that for males it is only control which contributes to 55%
(Adjusted R2= .550) change in their employee engagement while for females control
contributes only 40.9% (Adjusted R2= .409) change and career also contributes to 6.3%
(Adjusted R2= .063) change in their employee engagement. This means that apart from
facilitative support females want their leaders to provide them challenging work, and
career advancement opportunities.
The age wise regression results reveal that the employees in the age bracket of
18-35 years primarily want their leaders to focus on their career advancement, providing
them challenging and meaningful work, and keeping confidence that one can meet the
challenges of the job as leadership strategy of career contributes to 63.8% (Adjusted R2=
.638) change in the employee engagement of the employees in the age group of 18-35
years. However the employees in the age group of 36-55 years want control from their
leaders as it leads to 43.6% (Adjusted R2= .436) change in their employee engagement.
The sector wise regression shows that the public sector employees prefer control
which contributes to 40.5% (Adjusted R2= .405) change in their employee engagement
while private sector employees want their leaders to focus on leadership which contributes
53.5% (Adjusted R2= .535) to their employee engagement. This means private sector
employees want their leaders to convey their roles clearly, provide feedback, keep track
of small improvements, clarifies expectations and convey trust in order to keep them
engaged while the public sector employees as typical of the sector want their leaders to
provide freedom to work as well as keep an eye on what they do in order to keep them
engaged (Table 3).
 Lather and Jain , Ten C's Leadership Practices Impacting ...
69

When regression was applied by years of experience it was found that the
employees with 0-5 years experience feels more engaged if their leaders focus on their
Career as it contributes to 59% (Adjusted R2= .590) change in their employee engagement.
This means to remain engaged they want their leaders to focus on their career advancement,
providing challenging and meaningful work, and keeping a confidence that the individual
can meet the challenges assigned. The results further show that the employees in the
experience bracket of 6-10 years feels more engaged when their leaders keep a Clarity.
This leads to 78% (Adjusted R2= .780) change in their employee engagement. The
employees in this experience group want that their leaders should maintain clarity about
vision, mission and goals of the organization, and ones contribution to the attainment of
this vision, mission, goals and success of the organization. The results also show that for
employees with 11- 20 years of experience and above 21 years of experience it is only
control that contributes to the employee engagement up to 52% (Adjusted R2= .520) and
25.7% (Adjusted R2= .257) respectively.
Regarding level of management, regression shows that for entry level managers
the leaders strategy to focus on Career contributes to 47.8% (Adjusted R2= .478) change
in their employee engagement while for middle and top level management it is the Control
strategy of leaders that contributes to their employee engagement by 38% (Adjusted R2=
.380) and 71% (Adjusted R2= .710) respectively (Table 3).
Table 3: Stepwise regression of Leadership Practices on Employee Engagement
70 Vilakshan, XIMB Journal of Management, Vol.12 (II), September, 2015

Conclusion and Managerial Implications

Complete emotional engagement is the call for the organizations if they have to
sustain and excel in competition. Leaders play a vital role in the development of engagement
by role-modeling the morals and characteristics that are linked with engagement drivers,
such as being supportive, and providing a vision to the employees. However, this also
helps little because the individual requirements for engagement differs across genders,
age groups, experience groups and even level of management. What might engage males
may not engage females. As is evident from the results of the present study, the males
feel more engaged when leaders demonstrate democratic control while for females,
leaders focus on their career advancement apart from control are important. For the
employees below the age of 35 years the leaders focus on their career advancement
engages them while for employees above the age of 35 years, democratic control engages
such employees. The public sector employees seek democratic control to be engaged
while the private sector employees look for clarity in conveying their roles, providing
feedback, keeping track of small improvements, clarifing expectations and conveying
trust to keep them engaged. The employees below 5 years of experience feels engaged
when leaders focus on their career development. The employees between 6 to 10 years
of experience feels engaged when goals and employees contribution to the organization
are clearly conveyed, while employees with experience above 10 years only want their
leaders to keep a democratic control. Even as per level of management, the entry level
managers want leaders to focus on their career growth while middle and top level managers
only want democratic and supportive control to keep them engaged. So it becomes
mandatory for the leaders to analyze what will engage their employees based on their
gender, age, experience, sector of working and level of management and then adopt the
leadership practices to keep their employees engaged.
 Lather and Jain , Ten C's Leadership Practices Impacting ...
71

References
Aon Hewitt (2012). The Multiplier Effect-Insights into how senior leaders drive employee
engagement higher, retrieved from http://www.aon.com/attachments/thought-leadership/Aon-
Hewitt-White-paper_Engagement.pdf

Balakrishnan, C., Masthan, D., and Chandra, V. (2013). Employee retention through employee
engagement - A Study at an Indian International Airport, International Journal of Business
and Management Invention, 2(8), pp 09-16

Bhatnagar, J.(2007). Talent management strategy of employee engagement in Indian ITES employees:
key to retention, Employee Relations, Vol. 29 Iss: 6, pp.640 663

Blessing White (2013). Leadership development vs employee engagement retrieved from http://
blessingwhite.com/article/leadership-development-vs-employee-engagement/

Bouffard, W. L. (2012). Ten leadership qualities that fuel employee engagement retrived from http:/
/hiring.monster.com/hr/hr-best-practices/workforce-management/improving-employee-
relations/employee-engagement.aspx

Colbert, E.M. (2012). The impact of leadership on employee engagement at a chemical manufacturing
company in the United States. Dissertations available from ProQuest. PaperAAI3537415. http:/
/repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI3537415

Cross, R., Gray, P., Gerbasi, A. and Assimakopoulos, D. (2012). Building engagement from the
ground up: How top organizations leverage networks to drive employee engagement.
Organizational Dynamics 41, 202211

Desai, M., Majumdar, B., and Prabhu, G.P. (2010). A Study on employee engagement in two Indian
businesses, Asian Journal of Management Research, 1(1), pp. 81-97.

Employee Engagement, A review of current Research and its Implications published in 2006 by
The Conference Board

Esty, K. and Gewirtz, M. (2008). NEHRA the voice of HR- creating a culture of employee engagement
retrieved from http://www.boston.com/jobs/nehra/062308.shtml on 2009-05-04.

Giallonardo, L.M., Wong, C.A. and Iwasiw, C.L. (2010). Authentic leadership of preceptors: predictor
of new graduate nurses work engagement and job satisfaction. Journal of Nursing
Management, Vol. 18, pp 9931003

Javier, F.G. (2011). Managers leadership styles and employee engagement: Quantifying managers
influence. PhD Research Dissertation submitted to Capella University.
72 Vilakshan, XIMB Journal of Management, Vol.12 (II), September, 2015

Jha, P. (2015). Employee Engagement in India. retrieved from http://www.siliconindia.com/magazine-

articles-in/Employee_Engagement_in_India-LSIG745228257.html

Kahn, W.A. (1990). Psychological conditions of person engagement and disengagement at work.
Academy of Management Journal, 3, 692-724.

Khuong, M.N. and Yen, N.H. (2014). The effects of leadership styles and sociability trait emotional
intelligence on employee engagement A study in Binh Duong City, Vietnam, International
Journal of Current Research and Academic Review, Volume 2 Number 1 pp. 121-136

Kohli, K. and Grover, M. (2013). Economic slowdown: A threat to Every Indian Workplace Retrived
from http://businesstoday.intoday.in/story/economic-slowdown-a-threat-to-every-indian-
workplace/1/196929.html

Kohli, P. (2014). Driving growth and productivity in Indias hospitals. Business Journal, Jan 16,
2014. Retrievd from http://www.gallup.com/businessjournal/166730/driving-growth-
productivity-india-hospitals.aspx

Landman, E.P. (2012). The relationship between transformational leadership, employee engagement,
job characteristics and intention to quit. Dissertation submitted to Stellenbosch University
available at http://scholar.sun.ac.za

Lockwood, M.A. (2008). The relationship of self-efficacy, perceptions of supervisor leadership

styles and blue-collar employee engagement. Doctoral thesis. Phoenix: University of Phoenix.

Macey, W.H. and Schneider, B. (2008), The meaning of employee engagement, Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 3-30.

Marquard, M.J. (2010). Leadership behavior impact on employee engagement. A dissertation

submitted to Pepperdine University, Graduate School of Education and Psychology

Menguc, B., Auh, S., Fisher, M., and Haddad, A. (2013). To be engaged or not to be engaged: The
antecedents and consequences of service employee engagement. Journal of Business Research
66, 21632170

Padmanathan, S. R. (2010) Leadership styles and employee engagement. Masters thesis, Universiti
Utara, Malaysia.

Pandey, S., and David, S. (2013). A Study of engagement at work: What drives Employee
Engagement? European Journal of Commerce and Management Research, 2 (7), pp. 155-161
 Lather and Jain , Ten C's Leadership Practices Impacting ...
73

Papalexandris, N. and Galanaki, E. (2009),Leaderships impact on employee engagement,

Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 30 Iss 4 pp. 365 385

Pati, S.P., and Kumar, P. (2011) Human resource practices as engagement driver: an empirical
investigation in Indian software development firms, International Journal of Indian Culture
and Business Management Vol. 4, No.5 pp. 473 490

Salanova, M., Lorente, L., Chambel,M.J. and Martnez,I.M. (2011). Linking transformational
leadership to nurses extra-role performance: The mediating role of self-efficacy and work
engagement. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 67(9), 22562266.

Seijts, Gerard H. and Dan Crim (2006). The ten Cs of employee engagement. Ivey Business Journal,
March/April 2006. http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdf ? vid=18&hid=109&sid= 21a25099-
6e82-4e66-849c-92a8d3ee0c6e%40sessionmgr102. Retrieved on 2006-11-09.

Simmons, B. L. (2010). Employee engagement and performance: Finally some credible evidence.
Available at http://www.bretlsimmons.com/2010-07/employee-engagement-and-performance-
finally-some-credible-evidence/#ixzz1Rt6FiMFH

Singh, L.P., and Panda B. (online). Employee engagement in Indian scenario - a case study of Tata
tele services limited (TTSL), DRIEMS Business Review, 1(1), http://www.driems.ac.in/mba/
Download/8%20EMPLOYEE%20ENGAGEMENT%20IN%20INDIAN%20SCENERIO-
%20A%20CASE%20STUDY%20OF%20TATA%20TELE%20SERVICES%20LIMITED%20(TTSL).pdf

Singh, T., Kuamr, P., and Priyadarshini, P. (online). Employee engagement: A comparative study on
select Indian organizations. International Journal of Management Practices & Contemporary
Thoughts Retrieved from http://www.iimidr.ac.in/iimi/images/IMJ /Impact_Volume2_Issue2/
Employess.pdf

Stroud, R.N. (2009). The relationship between leadership competence and employee engagement.
Doctoral thesis. Neptune City: Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology.

Tims, M., Bakker, A.B., and Xanthopoulou, D. (2011). Do transformational leaders enhance their
followers daily work engagement?. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(1), pp 121-131

Walsh, C. (2012). Employee Engagement and the role of leadership: Creating alignment, synergy
and balance retrieved from http://www.eafinc.org/eaf/ leadership_employee_ engagement.pdf

Waqas Raja, M. (2012). Does transformational leadership leads to higher employee work engagement:
A Study of Pakistani service sector firms. International Journal of Academic Research in
Business and Social Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 1 pp 160-166
74 Vilakshan, XIMB Journal of Management, Vol.12 (II), September, 2015

Wells, B. (2013). The Goldilocks effect: Which leadership style engages employees the most?
Retrieved from http://blog.wonderlic.com/the-goldilocks-effect-which-leadership-style-
engages-employees-the-most

Xu, J. and Thomas, H.C. (2011). How can leaders achieve high employee engagement?, Leadership
& Organization Development Journal, Vol. 32 Iss 4 pp. 399 416

Zhang, T., Avery, G.C., Bergsteiner, H. and More, E. (2014). The relationship between leadership
paradigms and employee engagement. Journal of Global Responsibility 01/2014; 5(1).
DOI: 10.1108/JGR-02-2014-0006
Copyright of Vilakshan: The XIMB Journal of Management is the property of Vilakshan: The
XIMB Journal of Management and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites
or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However,
users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.