ABSTRACT The number of people engaging in social media has recently increased. Social media platforms are critical for networking, socializing, and, most importantly, reflecting on everyday life. Therefore, online spaces hold vast amounts of naturally occurring data on various topics, from consumer behavior to attitudes toward pro-environmental policies to political views and preferences. This allows Read More
Visit the URL and place your order with us. Fill basic details of your research paper, set the deadlines and submit the form.
Chat with our experts to get the best quote. Make the payment via online banking, debit/credit cards or through paypal. Recieve an order confirmation number.
Sit back and relax. Your well written, properly referenced research paper will be mailed to your inbox, before deadline. Download the paper. Revise and Submit.
The number of people engaging in social media has recently increased. Social media platforms are critical for networking, socializing, and, most importantly, reflecting on everyday life. Therefore, online spaces hold vast amounts of naturally occurring data on various topics, from consumer behavior to attitudes toward pro-environmental policies to political views and preferences. This allows researchers to gather data that would otherwise have taken much time and resources. The term “social media” refers to any social online data apart from email; social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram are particularly popular with researchers because of their scale and popularity. Researchers also work with data gathered in discussion forums, chat rooms, and via blogging sites such as WordPress. The use of social media is a growing phenomenon in contemporary society. Social media platforms offer users an easy way to access and develop networks of friends, families, and relevant professionals. The critical area of ethical concern is social media use in and out of the workplace. Employees use electrical devices in the workplace. Employers have noticed this practice, which has caused a backlash, as they have formulated new policies restricting using such devices while at work.
Many studies have investigated the viability of online communities/social media and marketing media. By contrast, social media has explored various aspects, including the risks associated with its use. It creates value by attaching a negative stigma to the workplace. Prior research has also investigated the use of social media for information sharing, seeking, and rendering help during critical events. The integrated view of our study’s extant literature can help avoid duplication by future researchers while offering meaningful lines of inquiry to help shape research in this emerging field.
My long-term research interests include developing a comprehensive understanding of electronic devices. Academically, this training and experience have provided me with a background in the Internet and technology. Along with providing me with new conceptual and technical training, the proposed training plan outlines career development activities and workshops such as public speaking, literature analysis, and career options. I chose to set the bar high in my family so that my children could and would not have an excuse not to graduate from college, so I am excited to keep pushing forward with my education. Overall, I feel that with my choice of sponsor, research project, and training, I will gain knowledge and understanding of the constantly evolving world of technology. s. The proposed research will provide my audience with new conceptual and technical training in dealing with and understanding the work ethics of the modern generations. Additionally, the proposed training plan outlines a set of career developments designed to enhance my ability to become an independent investigator. My choice of sponsor, research project, and training has provided me with a solid foundation to reach my goal of studying the development of later generations. This research will assist me in achieving the long-term goal of becoming an academic researcher.
The prevalence of social media use, especially among generations, makes it imperative to study its impact on individual users. The effects of social media are concerning because this population is already at a higher risk of adverse effects. The results of this study support those of previous studies that indicate that empirical evidence does not indicate a significant correlation between users’ time spent on social media and negative impacts on outcomes (Meier & Gray, 2014). In this study, the correlation between overall Work-Related Social Media Use (WRSMU) and employee engagement was not significant (-.908); therefore, it is likely that the effects of social media use are not directly resulting in the overall amount of time spent using these sites, but instead of factors that predispose individual characteristics, motivations of users using these sites, the specific experiences that young people have on social media, and the psychological process that is engaged in while spending time on the platforms. Importantly, social media has not created new problems, but may function as a new outlet that people have used to engage in maladaptive processes. Therefore, further research should examine how young people utilize social media and how these factors ultimately influence their self-esteem on various social media platforms.
Chapter 2 – Literature Review.. 19
Theoretical Orientation and Conceptual Development 19
Development of Employee Engagement 26
Engagement and Employer Feedback. 27
Engagement and job meaningfulness. 27
Engagement and Intrinsic Factors. 28
Engagement and Employee Retention. 29
Engagement and Hiring Practices. 33
Empirical Research on Employee Engagement 36
Leadership styles and engagement 39
Social Media and Social Capital 43
Advantages and Disadvantages of Social Media Use. 45
Social media and education. 46
Social Media and organizational success. 47
Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU). 52
Work-Related Social Media Use (WRSMU) 53
The relationship between WRSMU and WE. 53
Work-Related Stress (WR Stress) 57
Work-Related Communication (WR COM) 60
Variables and Operational Definitions. 65
Work-Related Communication. 67
Non-Work-Related Social Media Use. 67
Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) 70
Work-Related Social Media Use (WRSMU) 70
Demographics and Control Variables. 70
Chapter 4: Data Analysis and Results. 77
Chapter 5: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. 93
Interpretation of Results (by Research Question) 93
Research Question 1: How does Social Media Use (SMU) influence Workplace Engagement (WE)?. 93
Implications for Practice. 109
Implications for Research. 109
Recommendations for Future Research. 111
Section I: Demographic Questions. 138
Section II: Work Engagement 138
Section III: Reasons for Social Media Use. 140
Table 1: Table of Hypothesis. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table 2: Table of Variables. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table 3: Statistical Analysis Metrics Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table 4: Descriptives of Sample. 83
Table 6: Construct Reliability and Convergent Validity. 79
Table 7: Discriminant Validity (Fornell-Larcker Criterion) Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table 8: Discriminant Validity (Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio – HTMT) 80
Table 9: Construct and Variable Descriptives and Normality. 82
Table 10: Bivariate Analysis. 82
Table 11: Multivariate Analyses – Moderation Analysis. 89
Table 12: Multivariate Analysis – Mediation Analysis
Table 13: Multivariate Analyses – Multigroup Analysis
Figure 1: Reasons for Social Media Use. 25
Figure 2. Social media use in 2021. 41
Figure 4. Sample Generations. 77
Figure 5. Hypothesis 3 – Peer Pressure x Work-Related Social Media Use. 84
Figure 6. Hypothesis 4 – Peer Pressure x Work-Related Social Media Use. 85
Figure 7. Hypothesis 5 – Entertainment Value x Non-Work-Related Social Media Use. 86
Figure 8. Hypothesis 6 – Social Media Use X Non-Work-Related Social Media Use. 87
Figure 9. Structural Model Analysis Results. 90
Figure 10. Multigroup Analysis. 91
Figure 11. Multigroup Analysis-A. 91
Figure 12. Multigroup Analysis-B. 92
This proposed study expands upon the research by Ibongia (2018) and will explore how Generation Z (Gen Z) works the nature of the workforce and redefines workplace engagement. Organizations strive to gain a competitive advantage over their rivals and expand their market size. Various competencies and resources are crucial for realizing such a significant task. One of the most critical components of an organization is human capital, which directly affects its productivity. Experts have suggested that employee engagement is necessary to evaluate the motivation of workers in an organization. Therefore, examining such a concept will offer invaluable evidence on how organizations can assess their businesses and improve engagement. This correlational predictive study used multiple regression analysis to examine the predictive relationship between social media use among Generation Z and workplace engagement levels. This study’s theoretical framework was Kahn’s Employee Engagement theory, which Ibongia (2018) proposed to explain millennials’ engagement in the workforce. The Social Media Use Survey (SMS) was used to measure social media use, and the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) measured employee engagement using an electronic questionnaire. The study had a sample of (N=73) millennials from Millipore Sigma and a confidence level of 95%. Several regression analyses have examined whether social media use behaviors among millennials are predictive of their workplace engagement levels. This study contributes to gaps in social media with Gen Z in workplace engagement levels.
According to PrakashYadav and Rai (2017), Gen Z employees ages 18-25 are the most social media users in the workplace. Seventy-four percent of Gen Z employees below 20 years of age used Instagram. Sixty-two percent of Gen Zers 18-25 years old use YouTube daily (Prakash Yadav 2017). Snapchat boasts the youngest audience across the social media sites discussed here, with most users under 24 (Statista, 2018). Snapchat sees about 187 million daily users, many of whom work to extend their streaks, which is an event that occurs when two users send messages to each other many days in a row (Statista, 2018). Gen Z employees use social media to promote products, engage with customers and brands, and communicate effectively (Social Media Outlook for 2018, 2018). They also used their accounts for personal entertainment and sought professional information. These employees say social media use does not lower their organizational engagement or interfere with their work productivity (PrakashYadav & Rai, 2017).
Some organizations ban Gen Z employees from using their smartphones, leading to lower productivity, loud offices, and never having meetings because they never look up. The Global Web Index reported that Gen Z employees could spend approximately three hours daily on social media to facilitate their activities (Król & Zdenek, 2020). Gen Z employees want to use their phones even when performing work that requires serious concentration (Reagan 2021). Gen Z, on average, checks their phones more frequently than any other generation, averaging 84 times daily, according to the Bradley University blog (2021). Although social media can positively impact the business, Gen Z employees use it to satisfy their personal needs and branding. They do not promote products or conduct marketing research on social media sites (Vitelar, 2019).
This proposed research project will discuss the implications of social media for organizational performance and engagement (Sayyed & Gupta, 2020). According to CareerBuilder (YEAR), 24% of employers report that they have fired people to use the Internet for non-work activities (such as social media) during the workday, and 17% of employees have been dismissed because of something posted on social media. In the workplace, it is crucial to raise awareness among Generation Z about the potential negative consequences of social media usage, which may include a high level of distraction, inaccurate posts, misrepresentation of the company, replacement of face-to-face communication, excessive sharing of personal information, and dissemination of sensitive or illicit content (Jenkins, 2019).
Based on the literature review, there has been a significant exploration of engagement within the workplace and its evolvement. Researchers have addressed how social media use is vital in influencing company performance. Other experts, such as Maslach et al. (2001), have addressed burnout and their impact on employee engagement. Kahn’s (1990) discovery showed that personal attention and disengagement rely on how well employees feel connected to organizational goals. However, minimal studies have addressed the issue of Gen Z and social media use in the workplace. The authors have not focused on how social media use impacts employees’ engagement in the workplace. The current study will help contribute to the literature by exploring the chosen research questions relating to the study topic. Understanding social media’s impact will be crucial to how employers deal with the platforms.
This study is essential to organizations incorporating social media and allowing Gen Z employees to access social media sites while working. This research will enable an employer to determine whether social media usage benefits the organization or lowers productivity. It will also allow them to know how Gen Z employees use social media and if it can affect their organizational behavior and performance. Failing to conduct this research would increase the misunderstanding and negative impacts caused by their employees on social media within the organization. It will also negatively promote morale and behavior where employees focus on social media rather than their assigned tasks. This research will give insight and a better understanding of Gen Z employees and their dependence on social media. It will also provide insight into Gen Z employees’ thought processes and values. Therefore, it is vital to carry out this study to improve its performance, understanding, and success.
RQ1: What is the influence of social media use on workplace engagement?
RQ2. How does peer pressure influence social media use in the workplace?
RQ3: How does entertainment value influence the relationship between NWRSMU and WE?
RQ4: How does work-related (WR) stress influence the relationship between NWRSMU and WE?
RQ5: How does information sharing influence the relationship between WRSMU and WE?
RQ6. How does work-related communication influence the relationship between WRSMU and WE?
RQ7. What is the influence of generation differences in social media use and WE?
Definition of Key Terms
The primary purpose of the current quantitative study was to determine and investigate the impacts on social media use (distractions, the credibility of information, wastage of materials, and inappropriate posting) and the work engagement of Generation Z employees within one organization country. The study will show social media’s significant role in employee performance and behavior within the stated generation.
The previous chapter discussed the overall study background, highlighting the topic regarding Generation Z. It highlighted the research questions, the conceptual framework used throughout the study, the limitations, and the study’s significance. Every researcher aims to achieve a particular goal in their research. Hence, its evident importance can improve its overall chances of success within the specified field of study. A theoretical framework is the basis for a research study because it offers guidelines on how a researcher should work within the current research. The success of the whole research study will depend on how well the researcher uses all the materials.
Over the years, organizational managers have shifted their focus toward enhancing human resource skills by increasing their engagement in the workplace (Dagher, Chapa, & Junaid, 2015). These ideologies are rooted in past researchers and organizational leaders who believed that employee engagement could enhance the overall quality of their work. Initial ideas of employee engagement take researchers back to Kahn’s article, produced in 1990 (Kahn), which addressed the original concept of personal attention and dissatisfaction in the workplace. Employees dissatisfied with their workplaces displayed characteristics such as disengagement from the organization’s goals and objectives. A past study showed that employees engaged more in their activities based on their beliefs regarding their capabilities (Dagher, Chapa, & Junaid, 2015). Hence, employers needed to ensure and show their trust in the performance of different tasks. Some employees may fail to perform specific tasks because they do not trust their expertise.
Employees cooperating and engaging in various activities help ease the leaders’ overall management process. Before Kahn came into existence, some studies by authors such as Taylor and Gilbreth had focused on similar ideologies with different concepts (Dagher, Chapa, & Junaid, 2015). In their work, they focused on integrating as a determiner of the success displayed by additional employees. They believed employees needed to feel engaged through successful integration in organizational meetings, conflict resolution processes, and training (Dagher, Chapa, & Junaid, 2015). Managers needed to ensure they could introduce the employees to various activities related to their skills. Experts have connected these researchers as the founders of employee engagement in a contemporary work environment. Integration of the employees relates directly to employment, where employers allow employees to participate in crucial roles within the company.
The researcher will use employee engagement, social media, and job satisfaction as the theoretical framework of this proposed study. The employee engagement theory states that organizational leaders ensure employees improve performance and productivity. Kahn (1990) noted that engagement occurs when fully dedicated employees work. An organization with committed and engaged employees will always perform beyond its limits. Employee engagement has helped retain employees in the organization (Singh et al., 2016). Kahn (1990) argued that employee engagement is not constant.
In some cases, employee engagement is low due to conflicts, and there are times when it is high due to motivation. Employers should strive to maintain constant employee engagement. Kahn (1990) suggested that employers should approach employees as real partners. They need to involve them in the decision-making process. Kahn (1990) also explained how employees should express themselves freely.
Singh (2016) argued that employee management is enhanced when employees participate in business activities. The theorists also argued organizational learning strengthens employee engagement. Employers can improve employee engagement by training their workers, and teamwork also enhances employee engagement. Singh et al. (2016) stated that the connection between leaders, the team, organizational support, and corporate culture is determined by employee motivation. Employees motivated in the organization are more engaged. The researchers also suggested strategies employees can use to improve employee management (Stahl, 2019).
Social media theory studies social interactions among employees in the organization that provides the social media platform. Kent & Li (2020) argued that social media represents a new communication paradigm. Promoting products Companies use social media to increase services and sales.
According to Kanuri, Chen, and Sridhar (2018), social media enhances communication and strengthens organizational public relations. The researchers recommend that employers adopt social media to facilitate communication among employees. Effective communication among the members of the organization enhances teamwork. Kanuri et al. (2018) suggested that social media content enables social media users to reach a larger audience.
Social media users can remain relevant on their websites by posting more stories. Therefore, social media users strive to be active and post more content to gain followers. The researchers also suggested that social media helps build positive reputations and helps organizations generate more revenue. Researchers also claim that social media encourages knowledge sharing among employees. It enables employees to obtain more information from social sites. Social media facilitates collaborative learning, which increases employee engagement. Therefore, social media is vital in improving company employee engagement, which leads to organizational success. However, inappropriate use of social media can affect the business. It occurs when employees spend most of their time on social media sites instead of working. Social media can also lower employee engagement when employees use the site to insult and troll each other. Therefore, employers must monitor social media use in organizations to prevent adverse business occurrences that might affect operations and business performance.
Job satisfaction theory examines employee satisfaction in the organization. Job satisfaction refers to the contentment of employees with their jobs. Employees have satisfaction with their jobs when the organization caters to their needs. Employees who are satisfied with their organizations demonstrate employee engagement and performance improvement. Happy employees have a positive attitude towards their work and improve their performance. Kim, Thou, Topcuoglu, & Kim (2020) examined the relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR), quality of life, job satisfaction, and levels of job satisfaction. The study results indicated that CSR impacts employees’ quality of life and promotes employee satisfaction. Employers can encourage job satisfaction by recognizing their employees’ efforts and performance (Kardaras, 2016). They should also allow them to grow their careers by obtaining information from various sources. Employers also need to reduce environmental pressures that can demotivate employees. They must provide favorable work rules, facilities, meal breaks, and wages. Therefore, job satisfaction improves the work performance of employees.
Generation Z: They were born between 1996 and 2015, but we focus on the years up to 2004. The oldest members of this generation are now entering their 20s. Gen Z is the fastest-emerging generation of employees, consumers, and trendsetters. The younger members of Gen Z are still very young. Anticipate that the end of Gen Z was somewhere around 2015. Gen Z has numerous technologies and are coming of age with events shaping their worldview, including:
Generation X: They were born between approximately 1965 and 1976. It came of age during skyrocketing divorce rates in the U.S., a new trend of both parents working, and the birth of personal computing and personal technology devices, such as the Commodore64, Atari, and Walkman.
Witnessing the start of MTV (1981), I was influenced by popular high school movies, such as Sixteen Candles and The Breakfast Club.
Gen X—particularly in the U.S.—came of age during critical events, including:
Gen X has proven to be an excellent leader and has founded many of today’s most influential tech companies. Gen X is the glue that holds everything together within many workforces. They are at a critical moment in both life-stage and leadership roles—they are already taking over senior leadership roles, a trend that will only accelerate.
Millennials: Born between 1977 and 1995, this generation could have the characteristics of both Millennials and Gen X if they were born in the early part of the generation. This is an advantage because it makes you empathetic to both generations. They will be measured by gender and employment status (i.e., labor, supervisor, or manager).
Baby Boomers: Born approximately 1946 to 1964. A tidal wave of births created the appropriately named Baby Boomer generation, representing a boom in the birth rate. This generation came of age in the aftermath of WWII, during economic growth and the creation of suburbs. Baby Boomers also came of age during a time of massive social change. Key events that influenced Baby Boomers as they came of age include:
Baby Boomers are known for their work ethic, style, and impact on organizational leadership. They are also the parents of Millennials!
The conceptual framework demonstrates why Gen Z employees use social media and its impact on their performance. Figure 2 shows the reasons for social media use. The variables are in one figure because they apply from the same system. The arrows pointing to the right indicate why Gen Z employees use social media. They use social media for entertainment, communication, building relationships, and obtaining information. The arrows pointing to the right indicate that increased social media use can improve engagement due to increased communication, stable working relationships, and knowledge sharing. Therefore, social media can appropriately enhance the performance of an organization. The dependent variables of this proposed study are entertainment, communication, relationships, and information, while the independent variable is engagement levels.
Figure 1: Reasons for Social Media use
Over the years, organizational managers have focused on enhancing human resource skills by increasing workplace engagement (Dagher, Chapa, & Junaid, 2015). These ideologies are rooted in past researchers and organizational leaders who believed that employee engagement could enhance the overall quality of their work. Initial ideas of employee engagement take researchers back to Kahn (1990), who addressed the original concept of personal attention and dissatisfaction in the workplace. Employees dissatisfied with their workplaces displayed characteristics such as disengagement from the organization’s goals and objectives. Dagher et al. (2015) showed that employees engaged more in their activities based on their beliefs regarding their capabilities. Hence, employers needed to ensure and show their trust in the performance of different tasks. Some employees may fail to perform specific tasks because they do not trust their expertise.
Employees cooperating and engaging in various activities help ease the leaders’ overall management process. Before Kahn (1990) came into existence, another study focused on similar ideologies with different concepts, as Dagher et al. (2015) illustrated. In their work, they focused on integrating as a determiner of the success displayed by other employees. They believed employees needed to feel engaged through successful integration in organizational meetings, conflict resolution processes, and training (Dagher et al., 2015). Managers needed to ensure they could introduce the employees to various activities related to their skills. Experts have connected these researchers as the founders of employee engagement in a contemporary work environment. Integration of the employees relates directly to employment, where employers allow employees to take part in crucial roles.
Gaber (2007) focused on employee engagement as a significant component within the workplace. Employers can attain the needed attention in an organization by allowing employees to acquire relevant and valuable feedback on their performance. Employees must work in an environment where they can improve their skills and become independent of their employers’ guidance. Positive and fast feedback on employees’ performance increases their chances of engagement within the workplace. Gibson et al. (2013) and Alagaraja & Shuck (2015) noted that employees were likelier to stick to an organization that encouraged participation. Gen Z employees feel more valuable when exercising their skills to improve the organization. The engagement of Baby Boomers, Millenials, Generation X, Y, and Z employees appears critical for all employees and employers (Fiorenza 2020).
The idea of engagement came into existence through Kahn’s (1990) article on personal attention. Ability to capture and use internal skills (Dagher et al., 2015). Achievement of this internal understanding entailed the consolidation of the employees’ cognitive and emotional perceptions. The latter combined the two aspects of their lives to achieve different organizational roles. Kahn (1990) offered significant insights into the element of employee engagement. The author claimed that meaningfulness and availability affected employees’ engagement in different positions (Dagher et al., 2015). First, he cited the concept of meaningfulness as the state in which an employee felt essential and relevant to the company’s tasks (2015, as noted in Dagher et al., 2015). In different studies, employers who made employees feel worthless about their position lowered their overall engagement process. The idea of availability relates to how well employees show their general emotional connection to the organization (Dagher et al., 2015). Strong emotional relationships increased the overall engagement of the employees.
Maslach et al. (2001) focused on a similar topic of employment through the dimensions of burnout. Typically, employees engage in various activities that contribute to their exhaustion. The authors noted that burnout led to dissatisfaction and the disengagement of different roles committed by the employees. Burnout occurs when an employee works too much in particular tasks with minimal rest. Poor management can affect how healthy employees complete their work for rest and other activities. A company that offers employees significant rest time increases their overall engagement. Workplaces that report high employee burnout tend to raise the chances of disengagement from tasks and organizational goals.
Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) increased employees’ understanding of corporate engagement. The authors furthered Maslach et al.’s (2001) works on burnout and its role in employee engagement. Their test model enabled them to understand how employees lowered their interest in different tasks due to exhaustion. Burnout represents a significant concept due to its mental and physical repercussions on those affected. Studies show burnout can negatively affect employees’ health (Dagher et al., 2015). Therefore, employers must understand how the concept strongly relates to enhancing employee engagement in the workplace.
Bakker and Demerouti (2008) highlighted how intrinsic motivational factors influence employees’ attention in the workplace. Business experts have struggled to define employee engagement within contemporary organizations worldwide concisely. Regardless of these inconsistencies, they have agreed on business engagement implications within any organization’s overall performance. Empirical evaluation of past studies has shown that researchers and other business experts cannot decide on the best definition of the concept (Shrotryia & Dhanda, 2020). Research on various business managers across organizations helped reveal a robust engagement toolkit incorporated by corporations worldwide. Their study discovered the concepts of alignment and effectiveness as critical components of any engagement tool. The research completed in 2017 offers additional insights into the development of employee engagement and its substantial impacts on any organization’s success (Shrotryia & Dhanda, 2020). Creating robust leadership tools can offer employees the needed guidance and leadership to succeed (Amah, 2018; Carasco-Saul, Kim, & Kim, 2015; Meiyani & Putra, 2019; Rao, 2017). According to the Gallup (year) study, achieving success across different operations is impossible without solid mentorship and employee participation (Jenkins 2021).
An additional study focused on employee retention as a key to the sustainability of an organization. A company’s ability to maintain a large inflow of employees increases its chances of success in changing business dynamics (Fletcher, Alfes, & Robinson, 2018). Experts focused on how organizations can enhance employee engagement by retaining employees. They discussed how employee training could expand employees’ expertise and motivate them toward different organizational tasks. Trained employees approach jobs differently, enhancing the organization’s performance (Fletcher et al., 2018). Past research focused on how trained employees preferred remaining within their current organizations. They felt more connected to the culture and tasks specified within the company. Consequently, such employees became more engaged in the jobs created within the company.
These authors explored the theory of social exchange relationships as the critical dimension of employee engagement training. They argued that an organization’s success relies on the strength of social exchange between employers and employees. Such a connection became enhanced through exercise as a way to improve employees’ engagement. When the latter enter an organization, they expect career growth and development (Fletcher et al., 2018). Such changes occur through mentorship, training, and workshops for the employees. Therefore, these employers can increase their relationship with employees by expanding their skills towards different roles. As a result, the employees feel more connected to the organization, developing their general engagement processes. Fletcher et al. (2018) mentioned the significant role of motivation and job satisfaction in enhancing retention capabilities. Authors have noted that employee satisfaction is a critical determiner of their engagement levels through employee engagement development. The current study has connected the ideas of job satisfaction with the overall retention of employees. The latter will remain within an organization; they feel satisfied and motivated to engage in different roles (Fletcher et al., 2018). Employers should explore ways to enhance the employees’ overall dedication and motivation within their organization. Such a strategy will ensure that employees remain within their current company. Their study results affirmed the vital connection between employee retention and engagement (Fletcher et al., 2018). According to Forbes (2019), unlike their millennial counterparts, Gen Z employers hop from job to job, leaving the employer unprepared to understand Gen Z’s holistic work experience.
Further studies have focused on creating employee engagement and its dominance within the workplace. “Employee engagement has found its way up from the relatively lower quarters of being housed, in one forgotten corner of the human resources (H.R.) or training and development departments to its villa in the C-suite (Popli & Rizvi, 2016, p. 965). They show the significance of the concept within the current business dynamics and the management of different organizations. Managers have become more aware of how employees’ engagement translates to productivity and their organizations’ success. Employees represent crucial players in a firm, and their performance can play a part in the success or decline of an organization. An interview with a General Electric manager has revealed how the firm views employee engagement impact (Popli & Rizvi, 2016). The manager noted the multinational corporation’s success in its everyday activities. Without such a tool, evaluating ways to enhance its sustainability would have become impossible. Changes within many business aspects have necessitated employers’ need to rethink employee engagement and its implications on their success (Popli & Rizvi, 2016). They have realized the overall role of employee engagement within the firms and their capability to withstand unstable business markets. Firms left behind while incorporating such strategies risk their inability to become sustainable.
Exploring outcomes generated from the concept is essential when reviewing employee engagement development. Each company aims to produce positive results by focusing on employee engagement. A Gallup (2017) study targeted almost 50,000 business units in 45 countries worldwide to understand the correlation between employee engagement and success. This study was conducted across all generations, occupations, and platforms (Clifton, 2017). Their discovery revealed how the concept was crucial in different organizational functions. First, they realized that more than half of the most successful organizations achieved their performances due to their strength in attaining employee engagement. The latter was the breaking point between successful and unsuccessful organizations (Popli & Rizvi, 2016). These authors supported earlier studies focusing on employee retention as a determiner of a successful organization. Hence, employers focused more on employee engagement, increasing their chances of success.
The more employees of an organization remain engaged, the higher their chances of being satisfied with their jobs. Retention of employees within a firm relies heavily on satisfaction levels and the organization’s retention capabilities (Fletcher et al., 2018). Therefore, employers intending to retain top-skilled employees focus on how well they evaluate and achieve their engagement. Sales employees with a high engagement capability increased their chances of expanding organizational sales within their departments (Guesalaga, 2016; Popli & Rizvi, 2016). Such studies show the strength and input made by focusing on employee engagement within the workplace. Thorough research on the concept has produced significant empirical evidence for its overall implications over the past decade. Employees with higher engagement scores displayed dedication and adherence to the organizational culture (Abbas, 2017; Popli & Rizvi, 2016). Gen Z is the first generation born with the internet and related technology. Gen Zers are the first in a world of vast technological innovations, including smartphones, tablets, social media, virtual reality, and even artificial intelligence (Duke & Montag, 2017). This generation has altered how the world thinks (Seymour, 2019).
The authors also focused on how job demands and resources acted as a concise theoretical framework for developing employee engagement within the workplace. Proponents of the model argued that job efficacy and autonomy within the workplace were crucial in influencing employee engagement’s overall strength (Albrecht et al., 2015). Enhancing the latter helped organizations increase productivity and achieve the needed organizational results (Albrecht et al., 2015). These authors have also posited the role of the theoretical model in explaining job burnout and dissatisfaction. Fully engaged employees displayed traits such as connectedness to their roles and lowered absenteeism cases in the workplace (Albrecht et al., 2015). Such information confirms the significance of employee engagement in strengthening the success of organizations. Fewer researchers have focused on the overall ideology of organizational culture and direction as a critical determiner of employment within the workplace (Albrecht et al., 2015). However, focusing on individual elements such as burnout and job satisfaction has revealed how employee engagement impacts success.
Additionally, experts focused on employee engagement as a determiner of a company’s competitive advantage. Organizations succeed in changing business dynamics based on understanding and defining competitive advantages. In most cases, an organization’s human resource component plays a crucial role in strengthening an organization’s competitive advantage (Albrecht et al., 2015; Kaliannan & Adjovu, 2015). For example, organizations focused on creating solid teams can enhance their competitive advantage over individual-based organizations. However, such an achievement will occur based on how OK employees within the unit display the needed level of engagement when performing different tasks (Albrecht et al., 2015). These findings prove the need for organizations to focus on employee engagement in teams and individual practices.
Albrecht et al. (2015) posited the need to focus on different human resource management practices as crucial determiners of employee engagement success. The selection of employees during a job application step can create and enhance employee engagement. Notably, employees seeking employment tend to focus on those roles that improve their skills and offer challenges to grow their minds and careers (Albrecht et al., 2015). Hence, employers must provide critical job roles and approaches to attract highly skilled employees. After hiring, employers must retain such employees by offering essential skills to improve their career development. The employers and the hiring team are crucial in identifying and selecting the best applicants who adapt quickly to their organizational culture (Abbas, M. (2017; Albrecht et al., 2015). Skillful hiring of employees provides a more comfortable transition within the company and increases the likelihood of acquiring the needed engagement.
More research has focused on the socialization aspect of new employees within the company after hiring. Experts have argued that employees will adapt faster in a company that enhances socialization across different job levels (Albrecht et al., 2015). Therefore, employers must create a healthy organizational culture and environment that encourages employees to integrate. Unconducive settings will lower the dedication and participation of such employees, which translates to reduced engagement (Albrecht et al., 2015).
A thorough literature review focused on employee engagement as a critical part of exploring the concept’s overall development. Understanding the originality of the idea requires a focus on the possible components that play a role in influencing the model’s creation (Popli & Rizvi, 2016). Over the years, researchers have introduced various constituents as determiners and drivers of employee engagement. For example, researchers noted that the idea of supervisor and employer support enhanced the level and strength of employee engagement (Albrecht et al., 2015). Employers must interact and show direct and indirect support for employees’ roles. The latter will feel more engaged in a company where managers support idea-sharing and encourage employee growth. Others have focused on the level of independence depicted within the organizations. Freedom relies on managers’ leadership skills and techniques (Milhem, Muda, & Ahmed, 2019; Popli & Rizvi, 2016). Companies that promote the autonomy of operations increase the overall engagement level of their employees. Independence enhances critical thinking and self-management within an organization, portraying a firm manager’s trust level (Popli & Rizvi, 2016). Consequently, such employees will feel more engaged in such an organization because it allows them to grow and explore their strengths and weaknesses. Ideas like career development training and support are crucial drivers in enhancing the employees’ dedication and engagement (Albrecht et al., 2015; Antony, 2018).
The development of employee engagement took a different approach by exploring the various levels within the concept. Experts believe that different levels occur when discussing and understanding employee engagement in the workplace (Alagaraja & Shuck, 2015). The first model focused on cognitive engagement as a crucial component of the overall concept. Proponents of the model have noted that cognitive engagement is the foundation for creating a solid employee engagement ideology. It focuses on an employee’s attributes and relationships with the organization (Alagaraja & Shuck, 2015). Focusing on perceptions created by the employee can help understand their overall attitude towards their roles. As Kahn (year) noted in earlier studies, personal engagement influences the employees’ overall performance and success (Alagaraja & Shuck, 2015). The experts’ research showed that employees might need to work towards an organization’s goal based on their cognitive engagement levels.
Next, the focus shifted to emotional engagement to increase the employees’ dedication. When an employee joins a firm, they make the personal decision to dedicate their time and skills to improving operations (Alagaraja & Shuck, 2015). Their willingness to work and achieve goals will help improve their attitude and engagement in the workplace. Getting connected to an organization can translate to the satisfaction or dissatisfaction of an employee. Their feeling of excitement and happiness when performing their tasks can offer an employer insights into the employee’s level of engagement (Alagaraja & Shuck, 2015). Once employees interact and engage emotionally and cognitively in the workplace, their activities become evident through behavioral engagement. The attribute focuses on employees’ behaviors, such as performance, which offer insights into employee engagement (Alagaraja & Shuck, 2015).
Over the years, numerous researchers have conducted comprehensive research on employee engagement within the workplace. These studies have taken generational changes based on the years the publications existed (Bhuwaneshwari & Kumar, 2017). First, experts have considered Kahn (1990) the founder because it was the earliest theory of personal engagement. Kahn was the first author to study the idea of employee engagement in the workplace directly (Bhuwaneshwari & Kumar, 2017). Kahn (year) interviewed camp counselors to shed light on the psychological factors that affected how well employees felt engaged in their workplace (Bhuwaneshwari & Kumar, 2017). Disengagement occurred due to a disconnection between these factors and how they affected employees’ overall performance. May, Gilson and Harter (2004) focused on how mental ideologies such as meaningfulness affect employees’ engagement in the workplace. Their results corresponded to the findings by Kahn (year) concerning the factors that increased employee engagement. Using a survey, May et al. (2004) found that employees felt more connected to their workplace when employers offered essential tasks that significantly impacted the organization. Meaningfulness occurred when these employees felt the managers strongly valued them.
Maslach and Schaufeli (2001) focused on the theory of job burnout as a critical determiner of any engagement in the workplace. They emphasized that employers must understand how burnout strongly correlated to workplace disengagement (Bhuwaneshwari & Kumar, 2017). Every employer dislikes burnout because it affects productivity and the success of their goals. Burnout occurs when employers overload employees with large amounts of work with minimal breaks and rest. Such an effect can have a detrimental impact on the employees’ health.
These events will lower the overall engagement of the workers within the workplace. These experts have argued that burnout is a multifaceted component that arises due to a wide range of psychological factors. They have mentioned job demand, task difficulty, and the workplace environment’s uncertainty as crucial players in these burnouts (Bhuwaneshwari & Kumar, 2017).
Additional authors focused on how social exchange theory played a part in influencing the rate of employee engagement in the workplace. Cropanzano and Mitchell (2005) focused on how the workplace acted as an extensive interdependent system. In this case, they argued that employees would feel better and highly connected to companies that appreciate their efforts and presence. For example, a company that offers training and first-hand experience to employees will increase such workers’ chances of increased engagement. Therefore, interdependence occurs when the company managers invoke a similar positive response from employees (Bhuwaneshwari & Kumar, 2017). When they behave rudely and detach from the employees’ sufferings and needs, employees will disengage from the company’s roles and objectives (Bhuwaneshwari & Kumar, 2017). According to the theory, employers must create a warm and robust connection with employees, increasing their engagement and overall productivity.
Osborne & Hammoud (2017) focused on the concept of Self-Determination Theory as a key to creating employee engagement. During the investigation, founders Deci and Ryan (2008) focused on enhancing the organization’s motivational factors. Their study found that employees’ behaviors related to their motivation to work in a company. The absence of motivational factors contributed to employee disengagement (Osborne & Hammoud, 2017). Therefore, exploring the self-determinant theory and its impact on employee engagement is crucial. They noted the concepts of meaningfulness that relate to past studies (Osborne & Hammoud, 2017). Generating solid connections in the workplace relied on employees’ overall sense of their company position.
Additionally, more empirical studies have focused on engagement’s impact on a company’s performance. Every organization engages in activities to generate more revenue and remain sustainable. One crucial player in attaining such goals relates to the workforce in the company. Experts have focused on how companies perform in the presence of an engaged employee. One study focused on how performance reviews were crucial in achieving employees’ integration and engagement (Cooper-Thomas, Paterson, Stadler, & Saks, 2014). Their discovery showed that employees felt more engaged when they increased their reviews and feedback on their performance. They noted that such employees worked harder to gain better reviews, translating into healthier organizational versions. They also posited that the loss of engagement could play a significant role in its demise. Cooper-Thomas et al. (2014) have argued that an organization with engaged employees increases its chances of success by generating more profits and improving overall customer satisfaction. Therefore, organizations should work on enhancing overall employee engagement.
Some authors have focused on leadership concepts and how they impact engagement within the workplace. Leaders play a significant role in influencing how employees integrate and behave. The leadership styles and skills incorporated within the company affect its success against its competitors. Lowe (2012) has shown a correlation between how leaders lead and employees behave. Strong leadership characteristics increase how employees act in a company. For example, participatory leadership skills allow employees to engage in numerous roles—employees who feel needed and worthy in a company increase their engagement. A leader should work to enhance how employees feel both physically and emotionally. As mentioned above, work burnout and employees’ non-engagement affect their overall motivation (Eldor & Harpaz, 2015). Employers can resolve issues by showing more concern about employees’ welfare. They can create flexible schedules that increase the resting periods of the employees within the workplace.
Research experts have focused on various concepts using empirical evidence to support their arguments. In one case, experts have addressed the schemas present within employee engagement, which enables business managers to explore their workers’ actions. Alagaraja and Shuck (2015) have focused on how employees display emotional, behavioral, and cognitive engagement. Viewing these models as separate eases employers’ ability to understand the actions and results generated by employees. Cognitive engagement is the foundation of the concept and determines the success of different tasks. Emotional attention has focused on how employees connect with organizational managers’ goals and purposes. Their level of happiness and excitement when performing their duties will help determine their suitability within the organization.
People and Rizvi (2016) offered empirical evidence on employee engagement drivers within the workplace. Each employee within an organization explores different components that affect their engagement levels. For example, a healthy support system within a company can strengthen employees’ willingness to work in an organization (Rao, 2017). Employers who fail to support employees working in the firm increase the risk of their turnover to other companies.
Additionally, experts have offered empirical evidence on job retention and its relationship to employee engagement. Job retention relates to the ability of a company to retain an existing employee based on their relationship. Employees tend to remain within an organization that motivates and satisfies them (Fletcher et al., 2018; Sharma & Garg, 2017). For example, a company that offers strong career guidance, support, and motivation reduces employee turnover. Organizational managers must focus on job satisfaction as the crucial determiner of employee satisfaction.
Technological advances have increased the frequency of overreliance on social media for communication. The topic has gained significant attention from researchers focusing on its various parameters within and beyond the workplace. Many social media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter, offer different features and enhance communication between other social groups. Tankovska (2021) indicated that over 3.6 billion people in 2021 used social media with varying platforms worldwide. The projected increase by 2025 could be as high as 4.41 billion people. Such information suggests the overreliance on the platform to enhance communication among individuals.
Figure 2. Social media use in 2021
Note: All differences shown in the DIFF column are statistically significant. The DIFF values shown are based on subtracting the rounded values in the chart. Respondents who did not answer are not shown. Source: Survey of U.S. adults conducted Jan. 25-Feb. 8, 2021. “Social Media Use in 2021”
Due to its interconnectedness, communication has become easy and widespread across different platforms. It has become possible to communicate with people in other geographical locations in one’s home’s comfort. Besides connecting people across the social scope, employees and employers have begun incorporating similar workplace platforms. It has become necessary for employers to evaluate and create stringent policies that regulate the use of these platforms. Their widespread use and interconnectedness mean that employees can easily engage with a broader range of people than traditional processes.
Chatzoglou et al. (2020) highlighted some of the uses of social media within organizations. Employees can use these platforms to increase their overall customer base. The approach will ease the marketing of existing and new products to these customers. These platforms interact with billions of individuals across the world. Companies can use such platforms to expand brand recognition to new customers. They have indicated the significance of using social media to increase its value and gains within the workplace. Under the social media theory, Kent and Li (2020) have argued that the platform has created a new shift toward communication between groups and organizations. More people embrace the new paradigm shift in touch due to its user advantages. Different organizations’ success relies on how well employers and employees can use available communication tools to build stronger connections. Appropriate usage of technology can have significant benefits to the company.
As more companies integrate technology within their organization, it becomes more critical to understand the different programs and devices that could impact its performance. These technologies help revolutionize activities and improve the overall ability to engage in other activities (Ali-Hassan, Nevo, & Wade, 2015). Experts have focused on the growth and usage of social media due to the new technological changes within and outside the workplace. Social media tools have gained use by companies and individuals due to their sociological aspects. They create a large community of individuals who share ideas and concepts daily. These tools’ instantaneous factor has increased their prevalence and preferences by users worldwide (Ali-Hassan, Nevo, & Wade, 2015). Research experts have focused on social media usage and its impact on job aspects. They have argued that introducing and incorporating social media have led to dramatic changes within the workplace by impacting how people engage and communicate. Social interactions have expanded due to the opening and incorporation of social media usage within the workplace.
Exploring social media usage concepts has introduced social capital and job satisfaction as critical parts of the new information technology tools. Experts have noted in their study that social media usage can positively and negatively impact an organization. Understanding the concept has introduced the theory of uses and gratification to deeply connect to social media in the workplace (Dolan, Conduit, Fahy, & Goodman, 2016). The approach focuses on how users fulfill their psychological needs, which opens up ideas such as satisfaction and dissatisfaction (Ali-Hassan, Nevo, & Wade, 2015). A person will frequently use a particular tool due to its ability to satisfy personal needs. The wide variety of social media tools has created many advantages, attracting varying users (Quinn, 2016). Selecting a particular social media tool will meet all users’ needs. Creating a single social media tool that satisfies its users’ needs would be impossible. The diversity of human needs makes it necessary to explore these usage variations.
Past research studies have emphasized social media usage and some of the everyday needs met with its use. Researchers noted the primary reason for social media platforms’ ability to enhance communication between people. Users expect these social media tools to strengthen and improve contact with people across different regions (Ali-Hassan, Nevo, & Wade, 2015). Therefore, their likes and dislikes for a particular model will depend on its ability to accomplish the primary task. Also, some users evaluate social media platforms based on their ability to meet pleasurable demands. These users select social media platforms as key sources of entertainment and relief from normal daily operations. They will abandon a particular social media platform due to their inability to satisfy their pleasure interests. Finally, some people seek social media platforms as critical information sources to benefit their cognitive needs (Ali-Hassan et al., 2015). For instance, intellectuals on different social media platforms may discuss modifying existing problems.
The idea of social capital defines the resources present within the broad interactions by individuals. It focuses on the benefits generated from the use and businesses created and supported within different social media platforms (Bharati et al., 2015). Ali-Hassan et al. (2015) focused on social capital as a crucial topic when exploring social media use. The authors studied individual social media platforms and their impact on creating ties and relationships. When examining the concept, experts have posited structural and cognitive dimensions regarding social capital. The former addresses connecting and associations generated from social media use. The latter addresses issues such as using shared codes within a social media platform (Ali-Hassan et al., 2015). The different components and offerings within these platforms increase their social ties. The growth of social media usage has made it possible for people across other regional areas to engage in real-time without the inconveniences created by distance and time. Some people view social media based on how well and healthy they generate relationships that benefit their lives. Such relationships can exist as solid personal ties or instrumental bonds that increase access to and share information.
Employees engage in different tasks based on their job description requirements. Employees’ job performance levels can determine whether they will retain workers. Experts have noted that social media can play a crucial role in influencing employees’ job performance (Bakker & Albrecht, 2018; Pitafi, Khan, Khan, & Ren, 2020; Yeshambel, Belete, & Mulualem, 2016). Ali-Hassan et al. (2015) have argued that some social media platforms may enhance job performance through social capital. The focus on its usage within the workplace showed that employees performed tasks better in areas where interpersonal communication took precedence. These tools helped enhance communication and offer a large pool of information sharing (Mariano et al., 2018). Therefore, creating solid relationships through the social capital model helped strengthen communication.
When employees socialize at work, they share essential ideas concerning their workplaces. These ideas can help translate their poor job results and improve organizational growth (Ali-Hassan et al., 2015). The benefits of such interactions will rely on the strength of these ties created between different employees across the departments. Weak interactions will fail to produce the needed interaction benefits despite the importance of social media within the workplace (Pitafi et al., 2018). For instance, a toxic work environment will fail to produce the needed productivity and interactions due to employees’ inability to create strong ties (Ali-Hassan et al., 2015). In this case, social media platforms will not achieve social and cognitive usage across the company. Positive connections will improve job performance compared to weak and hostile relations.
Getting engagement towards particular social media tools focuses on how well they satisfy the needs of these users. Their engagement details aspects such as passion and repeated usage of these tools due to their emotionally captivating capabilities (Smith & Gallicano, 2015). When people use social media platforms, they ignite an emotional connection, creating addiction and repeated usage. Such dependence increases social media frequency and reliance as a primary source of social and cognitive drivers, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of using social media.
Social media platforms have widely been used by over 73% of all Gen Z employees (PrakashYadav & Rai, 2017). The significant usage rate has raised concerns about social media’s threats and advantages. Scholars have highlighted various issues related to social media use within and outside an organization. Based on the penetration level of technology within the workplace, it has become challenging to curb the extent of its usage. Some experts have suggested that managers and organizational leaders implement the right strategies to manage social media effectively. Notably, social media has created a concern for privacy among users due to the information readily shared on different platforms. The misuse of confidentiality could have significant implications for the organization. Other than that, experts have argued that social media use could greatly benefit employees and employers within the organization.
Some experts have proposed how technology and social media have positively impacted the whole education field in a broader context. In the past, educators required the physical presence of students to conduct different learning activities (Özçakir, Fatih, & Özçakir, 2015). While working remotely, education became limited around geographical locations due to learning challenges. Fortunately, new technologies have enabled remote learning across different institutions, revolutionizing education. Online classes have paved the way for people from other regions to participate in extracurricular activities. Educational institutions are comprised of employees such as teachers and board members. These teachers share learning materials with colleagues across social media platforms. For example, one teacher can request assistance regarding specific topics. Hence, the idea of technology has become a significant boost for all learning institutions.
Another sector that has gained significant benefits is the medical field. Electronic health records in hospitals have allowed these experts to attend to patients better and in a more advanced way than before. Arguably, these doctors can talk about how to treat particular patients through these platforms. It has become easy to share information about patients in a confidential but fast manner through social media. The strategy ensures quick responses by medical experts across different branches. When they share patient ideas, it becomes easy to brainstorm appropriate treatment programs. On the same issue, experts have criticized sharing such confidential information through social media platforms. Chun et al. (2012) have cited problems related to how medical experts protect patients’ data. Despite their advantage in enhancing treatment procedures, these platforms do not offer full-proof protection of patients’ information. With the proper protection of patient privacy, social media has increased the success of patient outcomes when collaborations occur between doctors.
Mount and Martinez (2014) revealed that social media platforms have significantly boosted different organizations’ performance. Large multinational corporations worldwide have incorporated social media use within various business operations. First, social media has increased individuals’ interactions by allowing them to engage in multiple projects (Mount & Martinez, 2014). During virtual meetings, employees can share ideas concerning different tasks with their colleagues, which increases the organization’s success. Some employers use these platforms to explore various talents present within the markets. Some employees may post exciting and innovative projects, attracting potential employers. Some organizations have incorporated social media to provide and engage in communication with customers and interested partners. For instance, hotels have created social media platforms to communicate with attendants regarding different concerns. They may ask about the availability of rooms and particular amenities without physically visiting the hotels. Such information shows how significant technology has become within various industries. Experts have noted that social media may positively impact workers’ performance. Wimber and Carter (2014) showed that employees work more in task-oriented operations through these platforms. When faced with particular challenges, these employees can freely share ideologies, enhancing employees’ engagement in the workplace (Carlson et al., 2016).
Studies on Gen Z social media users indicated it is widespread in the workplace. For example, Prakash Yadav and Rai (2017) noted that approximately 62% of these young generation workers used YouTube within their organization. Such a significant number indicates the validity of some experts’ privacy concerns regarding social media use. Generation members have posited that social media is a great way to communicate with customers efficiently. Besides, they believe the platforms’ use can significantly strengthen its brand. Due to the many users within these platforms, Gen Z users think they can reach a wide range of new customers.
There have been disadvantages associated with using social media within the workplace. Due to the prevalence of young people using social media platforms for communication in the workplace, it has become necessary to create policies that will strengthen the appropriateness of technology. Organizations must implement policy measures to ensure appropriate technological usage (Li & Terpening, 2013). One study mentioned that the lack of such measures increased the chance of misuse of the platforms by different users. Despite the benefits offered by social media, mismanagement of these platforms has damaging impacts on organizations.
Employees’ engagement within the workplace enhances performance and increases the company’s overall gains. Attention shows how well employees’ connections are with the operations and occurrences within the company. Social media can enhance engagement by working closely with employees and employers. Therefore, the platform’s positive use will significantly benefit the organization’s success. Król and Zdenek (2020) have argued that social media usage without regulations can damage engagements and success. The authors conducted a study where they discovered that young employees, such as Gen Z, engaged in these platforms for more than 2 hours of their working schedule. Such many hours show how social media can reduce overall employee engagement. Algorithms created by social media owners to attract users have increased the addiction of Gen Z. Consequently, these addictions have lowered the chances of engaging more in the workplace.
Experts have also expanded their research studies to explore how social media has gained preferential usage in improving operations within the organization. They have argued that organizations may experience significant benefits from using social media employees. Organizations succeed based on the strength and usefulness of relationships between employees and non-employees (Smith & Gallicano, 2015). Therefore, they have posited that such firms benefit significantly from incorporating social media platforms. In this case, they have associated social media usage as a crucial benefit in enhancing employee connections and engagement (Ryan, Allen, Gray, & McInerney, 2017). For instance, scientists Panahi, Watson, and Partridge (2016) have significantly leveraged social media for their cognitive roles. Scientists from different disciplines created these platforms to interact and share new scientific ideas concerning improving other areas within their field (Collins, Shiffman & Rock, 2016). The ability of social media platforms to support remote interactions has made it possible for users to benefit significantly from its adoption. Some participants noted that social media could offer hedonic advantages, such as relaxing the brain (Greenwood, Perrin, & Duggan, 2016; Nduhura & Peeler, 2017). These participants emphasized that their use of social media had helped increase their concentration levels within their workplaces (Nduhura & Peeler, 2017). Studies helped affirm past findings regarding how social media use can help encourage engagement and achieve social media use (Wang et al., 2016).
Gen Z has experienced much disruption quickly, with political, social, technological, and economic changes. Including hyper-technological advancement, tumultuous world politics, racial inequity, and a pandemic make them fundamentally different even from Millennials—the generation that immediately preceded them—in their outlook (Ernst & Young, 2015). Compared to previous generations, Gen Z’s ready access to today’s technology makes them idealistic for learning, interpersonal interaction, and communication (Chicca & Shellenbarger, 2018; Twenge, 2017). Gen Zers also prefer technology to develop broader skills to plan for their future (Buzzetto-Hollywood & Alade, 2018). Therefore, employers should consider integrating technology with employee development and performance management systems. For instance, since Gen Zers tend to communicate with emojis, symbols, pictures, videos, and likes (Cilliers, 2017), digital performance tools that allow instant feedback could be helpful, especially on mobile devices (Kaplan, 2012). While some of this may seem over-the-top or trivial from the perspective of older generations, it is essential to realize the behavior of Gen Zers, and ignoring these can cause dissonance. Gen Z’s closeness with technology presents opportunities and challenges for employer organizations. For instance, many employers observe that Gen Z is more comfortable sending emails and text messages than calling someone or communicating face-to-face (Schwieger and Ladwig, 2018). Their autonomous nature technology has made their learning through video, social media, and search-independent endeavors (Seemiller & Grace, 2018). Understanding Gen Zers is critical to the success of businesses and gaining a competitive advantage. Little work has been done to translate research on this generation into opportunities and challenges for companies. Integrating technology, management, and organization should not only be attractive to Gen Zers, but this is likely the way of the future. For instance, individuals and organizations have found an increased utility for electronic and virtual communications, given the recent pandemic (Folsom, 2020).
Utility of employee engagement plays a vital role in increasing organizational performance and positive employee outcomes (Biswas & Bhatnagar, 2013). disengaged employees harm the organization and the country as well. For instance, a study conducted in the United States of America found that approximately half of its workforce was disengaged, resulting in impaired productivity and fiscal loss to the country (Kelleher, 2011).
Work engagement has received substantial attention from researchers interested in understanding how employers can enhance the productivity of their employees. Scholars have come up with various definitions of workplace engagement in the context of employees and their organizations. Clark et al. (2020) defined workplace engagement as “a positive state and indicates workplace fulfillment characterized by vigor (high activation) and dedication” (3). Therefore, the more involved an employee is in the workplace, the more engaged they are in her work. Additionally, Schullery (2013) defined engagement as the ability to “harness self in one’s role in the workplace” (255). These definitions indicate that workplace engagement is a construct that refers to the extent to which an employee is involved. More involvement in their activities shows that such employees have a greater engagement. This construct is relevant in the workplace because it is closely associated with increased employee productivity. Employers strive to create organizations where all the employees are fully involved in their work to maximize their overall results. A study by Reio & Sanders-Reio (2011) addressed the relationship between supervisor incivility and employee engagement. The results showed that the deviant behaviors of employers lowered employee engagement, which affected their overall productivity. The study by Clark et al. (2020) also highlighted some vital findings regarding the importance of dealing with specific antecedents, such as moral and workplace distress, to raise or improve employee engagement. The results confirm this construct’s significance in influencing workplace productivity, thus affirming its relevance in this research study.
Luo et al. (2018) discussed the growing focus by researchers on non-work-related social media use and the impact it could have on an organization. In their research, Luo et al. (2018) defined this construct as the indulgence of employees in activities within social media, such as blogging and tweeting, which do not directly relate to workplace tasks. Therefore, engagement in these social media platforms and actions do not contribute to an employee’s task completion. Interestingly, Luo et al. (2018) mentioned that non-work-related social media usage positively impacted employees’ psychological states. Another research article by Ng et al. (2016) identified using social media for non-work-related purposes to distract employees from unpleasant experiences. Ng et al. (2016) opined that using social media for distraction would negatively impact organizational outcomes.
The relationship between NWRSMU and WE.
Ng et al. (2016) discovered a negative relationship between employees’ engagement levels in the workplace and their use of social media for non-work-related purposes. The employees used social media to distract themselves from the overwhelming and uncomfortable workplace environment. Therefore, they remained less engaged in the workplace, which led to lower productivity. Surprisingly, Luo et al. (2018) discovered that non-work-related social media use might positively impact the employees’ affective commitment. They viewed social media as a platform for sharing information and allowing employees to rejuvenate their engagement after prolonged work periods. Another Syrek et al. (2017) study revealed a negative relationship between non-work-related social media use and employee engagement. These researchers conducted their study among 334 employees and discovered that using social media for purposes other than work tended to lower their overall employment in the workplace.
H1. NWRSMU is negatively related to Workplace Engagement (WE).
Social media has become an essential tool within and outside of the workplace setting. A research article by Van Zoonen et al. (2014) defined this construct as the engaged use of social media by employees in activities directly impacting the completion of a specific task. For example, using social media to share information on assigned tasks within a team will fall within this construct. Employees’ use of social media will directly impact the growth and realization of organizational goals. Van Zoonen et al. (2014) discovered that employees heavily rely on social media to share relevant information, leading to better managerial decision-making. Social media has become an upgraded version of traditional communication channels for these employees.
In their study, Van Zoonen et al. (2014) illustrated that work-related social media use positively impacted employee engagement. The participants noted that social media made it easier to resolve challenges because it encouraged more information sharing. People use social media because they need specific information to improve their problem-solving capabilities. Therefore, continued use of social media for work-related purposes positively impacted the extent of employee engagement. For instance, group cohesiveness occurred through social media engagement among these employees. A second study by Men et al. (2020) noted a positive association between the internal use of social media for work-related purposes and the level of engagement among employees. For example, employees tended to engage more in group discussions about their organization, which created more cohesion and strengthened their engagement levels.
H2. Work-Related Social Media Use (WRSMU) is positively related to Workplace Engagement (WE).
Consistent with Brown et al. (1986), peer pressure is a subjective experience of feeling pressured, urged, or dared by others to do certain things or doing particular things because others have pressured, encouraged, or dared to do them. In other words, the intentional or unintentional nature that group participants impose on the other participants enables them to act or react in a certain way.
Within social media settings, Gen Zers tend to join different social groups. Their groups tend to have common interests or likes and prefer to take opinions, references, and suggestions. Molding the attitudes of other members towards situations may subsequently influence their intentions.
H3. Peer Pressure (PP) moderates the relationship between (WRSMU) and (WE).
The influence of (PP) on the relationship between NWRSMU and (WE).
Peer pressure significantly influences other people’s actions, especially Gen Zers. Since social media is gaining widespread application and recognition in the workplace, it is vital to consider how peer pressure could influence or mediate the relationship between non-work-related social media use and work engagement. In one study by Quan-Haase & Young (2010), researchers noted that peer pressure affected the types of social media platforms users chose to interact with their peers. These platforms are based on reviews and suggestions made by their peers regarding those platforms that had the best experience. This peer pressure affected the choices and the type of material obtained by the users when in their workplaces. For example, peer pressure tended to influence participants to choose Facebook, which affected the kind of material consumed by the workers (Quan-Haase & Young, 2010). In most cases, these users would find themselves consuming content that did not relate to workplace expectations. Some platforms are suited for work-related tasks and are more suitable for non-work-related activities. Therefore, peer pressure had a significant influence on such factors.
H4. Peer Pressure (PP) moderates the relationship between (NWRSMU) and (WE).
Social Media usage provides escapism (Korgaonkar and Wolin, 1999, cited in Dzogbenuku et al., 2019). Enjoyment, pleasure, and anxiety relief described (Whiting and Williams, 2013, mentioned in Dzogbenuku et al., 2019) are some of the values offered by entertainment platforms. Over time, social media has gained notoriety for its entertaining content (Lee and Ma, 2012 as mentioned in Dzogbenuku et al. (2019) and has been reported to elicit positive attitudes toward a product or a brand (Dzogbenuku et al. (2019). The frequency of social media interactions has also become a regular indispensable routine (Dzogbenuku et al.,2019), such that its perceived utilitarian and perceived hedonic values have been reported to affect higher education service outcomes (Cao et al., 2019, as cited in Dzogbenuku et al. (2019).
The influence of (EV) on the relationship between NWRSMU and WE.
Even though Brooks (2015) says a negative correlation between social media usage and performance, other studies, such as Sledgianowski and Kulviwat (2009) and Dzogbenuku et al. (2019), reported a strong effect of social media entertainment content on performance and fulfillment. As a perceived hedonic benefit of social media (Venkatesh et al., 2012, as cited in Dzogbenuku et al. (2019), entertainment has been predicted in the UTAUT to lead to usage. Presupposes that social media entertainment, as suggested by Yazdanparast et al. (2016), can influence performance (Mingle and Adams, 2015; Guo et al., 2018, as cited in Dzogbenuku et al. (2019). Hence, we also contend that social media information can influence entertainment (Yazdanparast et al., 2016, as mentioned in Dzogbenuku et al. (2019), while enjoyment leads to performance (Guo et al., 2018, as cited in Dzogbenuku et al. (2019), then social media entertainment could mediate information (content) and performance.
Connection is the key to Gen Z’s social media platforms and staying in contact with friends and colleagues they wouldn’t usually see. This is to say social media information can influence entertainment (Yazdanparast et al., 2016), while enjoyment leads to performance (Guo et al., 2018). Social media entertainment could mediate information (content) and performance.
H5. Entertainment Value (EV) moderates the relationship between (NWRSMU) and (WE).
Moustakas & Constantinidis (2010) have argued that stress can be good because it encourages people to work extra hard to resolve challenges. However, they also mentioned that it might reach a point where stress becomes counterproductive because it affects the productivity of an individual. Moustakas & Constantinidis (2010) have defined unwanted workplace stress as environmental conditions where employees feel that a situation is stretching their capabilities while having minimal positive impacts or rewards on their lives. For example, these researchers shared an example of work-related stress where some employees may lack the necessary tools to help them achieve their assigned tasks. This would create the feeling of an environmental condition that only stretches their capabilities without easing their study completion.
The influence of WR Stress on the relationship between NWRSMU and (WE).
Khamisa et al. (2015) noted that work-related stress is associated with burnout, job satisfaction, and physical and mental health outcomes (Khamisa et al., 2015). Described as a state of physical and emotional depletion, burnout results from prolonged exposure to stressful working environments (Khamisa et al., 2015). The Maslach Burnout Model by Khamisa et al. (2015) postulates that prolonged exposure to environmental and situational stressors resulting in work-related stress contributes to emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and a lack of personal accomplishment. Similarly, work-related stress resulting from stressors, such as higher workloads, staff issues, and lack of resources, is associated with poor job satisfaction (Khamisa et al., 2015). Spector attributes this to a mismatch between job expectations and actual working environments, contributing to higher work-related stress and lower job satisfaction. Research confirms more elevated levels of job satisfaction within less stressful working environments. Stressors such as poor patient outcomes, conflict with peers, high workload and job demands, inadequate supervision, and lack of support are all associated with poor physical and mental health outcomes (Khamisa et al., 2015). Cannon’s stress theory explains this response as an imbalance in homeostasis, whereby prolonged exposure to stressors results in a breakdown of the biological system (Khamisa et al., 2015). This breakdown prevents compensatory and anticipatory changes that aid in coping, resulting in poor health outcomes such as headaches, insomnia, social dysfunction, and depression.
H6. Work-Related Stress (WR Stress) moderates the relationship between (NWRSMU) and (WE).
Information sharing refers to quickly exchanging relevant news via social media. Social media allows users to create, share, and seek content while facilitating communication and collaboration among users and between brands and users. Thus, social media users today have become active producers of information. Consumers today prefer to make an informed purchase decision by collecting as much information as possible, evaluating various options available, conducting a cost-benefit analysis, etc., making it mandatory for marketers to be present on social media.
The influence of Information Sharing (IS) on the relationship between WRSMU and (WE).
Social media can shape users’ attitudes toward the brand through mutual, two-way communication (Najmi, Atefi, & Mirbagheri, 2012, cited in Sheth, S., & Kim, 2017). Users expect a dialogue with brands on social media, in which the brands listen to what a customer thinks, needs, and wants rather than just pushing the product to the customer (Brown, 2010). Consumers join various brand-related social media groups or communities. For opinion expression, information exchange allows marketers to indirectly influence users’ attitudes toward their brands (Hair, Clark, & Shapiro, 2010, as cited in Sheth, S., & Kim, 2017). Studies have also supported users’ love to discuss their purchases and purchase experiences on social media.
Therefore, since the information comes from a third party, it positively influences the user’s attitude toward the brand (Chu, 2011, as cited in Sheth, S., & Kim, 2017). When users exchange information, they become the brand’s endorsers. Thus, marketers like Target, Walmart, Apple, Publix, Nike, Victoria’s Secret, etc., actively participate on social media. They encourage transmitting messages between users and brands, shaping their attitude toward the brand (Chu, 2011, cited in Sheth, S., & Kim, 2017). Marketers can facilitate communication and interaction by being present on social media. Chu 2011, as noted in Sheth, S., & Kim 2017 has supported those social media users who trust virtual brand communities and favor virtual brand communities (Sheth, S., & Kim, 2017). Gen Z follows two types of accounts: celebrities/creators (e.g., bloggers, vloggers, YouTubers, Instagrammers, social media stars, etc.) and meme accounts (YPulse, 2021).
H7. (IS) mediates the relationship between (WRSMU) and (WE).
Work-related communication refers to the direct interactions among colleagues aimed at solving specific tasks that benefit the organization. For example, team engagement would fall under work-related communication, where the members discuss resolving a problem within their area (Tushman, 1979). Technology changes have influenced how people communicate with each other to resolve specific challenges in the workplace.
The influence of (WR COM) on the relationship between WRSMU and WE.
One research article by Diaz et al. (2012) revealed that communication technology impacted how people engaged with each other in the workplace. They noted that colleagues needed to identify those technologies that could enhance the quality of their communication and ability to resolve specific issues relating to their work. Therefore, work-related communication needs directly impact the utilization of social media to enhance work-related tasks (Diaz et al., 2012). As a result, employees felt more engaged in their organization because they could utilize efficient communication technologies to support their work-related needs. An additional study by Wright et al. (2014) addressed employees’ perceptions regarding using technology to communicate in the workplace. They noted that the presence of specific communication needs in the workplace influenced the reliance on these technologies, which offered more efficiency in interactions with colleagues. Better communication between these colleagues contributed to high levels of workplace engagement. Therefore, work-related communication mediated or influenced the relationship between social media use and employee engagement.
H8. (WR Com) mediates the relationship between (WRSMU) and (WE).
This construct refers to the different age groups or categories representing other people. Some of the most common generations used in research include the baby boomers born between 1946 and 1964, Generation X born between 1965 and 1981, millennials born between 1982 and 1999, and Generation Z born in 2000 (Schullery, 2013). These generations tend to have different expectations and values within the workplace.
The influence of generation on the relationship of social media use on (WE).
Generation type is a necessary construct that influences individuals’ behaviors within the workplace and other social settings. Generation Z comprises those people born in 2000. Researchers have focused on this generation due to their exposure and influence on the workplace and underlying values. The youngest of the three main generations who use social media is Generation Z., Born between 2000 and 2010. Generation Z has been the most involved with social media and the most technologically advanced generation yet to face this society. As the ages go by, they are the ones who experience everything new, fast-paced, and with better qualities than the generations before them. One study by Prakash Yadav & Rai (2017) revealed that Generation Z had the most effective social media use rate among the rest of the generations. This overreliance on social media to communicate and get entertained tended to have a substantial impact on its use in the workplace. This generation has grown up relying on social media to communicate. Therefore, the frequency of social media in the workplace will increase in this generation because of this overreliance. Evidence by Prakash Yadav & Rai (2017) confirms that workplace employees’ generational characteristics will influence their use of social media for work-related activities. In contrast, other generations, such as Generation X and Millenials, have not been exposed to technology at rates similar to Generation Z. Therefore, this exposure will influence the frequency of use of social media for work-related activities, which consequently affects their engagement levels.
H9. There is a difference in social media use influence (WE) by generation.
| Research Questions | Hypothesis | Primary Theory |
| RQ1: What is the influence of social media use on workplace engagement? | H1. NWRSMU is negatively related to Workplace Engagement (WE) | Engagement Theory (Smith and Jones, 2021) |
| H2. WRSMU is positively related to Workplace Engagement (WE). | Media Effects
Advances in Theory and Research (Bryant & Oliver, 2019) Engagement Theory (Smith and Jones, 2021) |
|
| RQ2. How does peer pressure influence social media use in the workplace? | H3. Peer Pressure moderates the relationship between WRSMU and WE. | Stimulus-response theory (DeFleur and Ball – Rokeach, 1989) |
| H4. Peer Pressure moderates the relationship between NWRSMU and WE | Grounded Theory Method. (Glaser and Strauss, 1967)
|
|
| RQ3: How does entertainment value influence the relationship between NWRSMU and WE? | H5. EV moderates the relationship between NWRSMU and WE | Social Network Theory
(Liu et al., 1960)
|
| RQ4: How does work-related (WR) stress influence the relationship between NWRSMU and WE? | H6. WR Stress moderates the relationship between NWRSMU and WE | Effort-reward-imbalance theory (Siegrist, 2016) |
| RQ5: How does information sharing influence the relationship between WRSMU and WE? | H7. IS mediates the relationship between WRSMU and WE | Media synchronicity theory (MST) (Dennis et al., 2008)
|
| RQ6. How does work-related communication influence the relationship between WRSMU and WE? | H8. WR Com mediates the relationship between WRSMU and WE | Information sharing theory (Constant et al., 1994) |
| RQ7. What is the influence of generation differences in social media use and WE? | H9. There is a difference in social media use influence on WE by generation. | Generational Theory (Lyons et al., 2015) |
The methodology is an essential component of every research study. This particular research intends to explore social media’s impact on workplace engagement. It will focus on the Generation Z population to understand social media and workplace engagement. The generation provides extensive sources of information on how social media influences workplace engagement. Generation z comprises very technologically savvy people because they were born into an era of social media. Therefore, they will provide rich information on the problem in question. Researchers have always wanted to understand some factors influencing workplace engagement (Clark et al., 2020). The success of an organization relies on how engaged the employees are in the workplace. More engagement translates to more performance, which leads to greater productivity. The research model that will guide this research study comprises nine key hypotheses. The primary constructs or variables in question will be the entertainment value, work-related communication, work-related stresses, information sharing, generation differences, peer pressure, non-work-related social media use, and work-related social media use.
A researcher’s first task is to establish the type of research design that will enable the realization of the hypothesis. In this case, the most appropriate research design will be a quantitative research method. Quantitative research objectively evaluates research by collecting quantifiable data (Curtis et al., 2016). Although different research approaches exist, the main design adopted in this study is the correlation research design. This is a variation of the quantitative research method, which focuses on establishing the existence of relationships between one or more variables (Curtis et al., 2016). This will be a suitable research approach because it will help the researcher understand the types and degrees of relationships between the independent and dependent variables.
The research population consists of corporate employees from each generation. Based on G*Power analysis for a 95% power (see Appendix C) in an F Test with eight predictors, the required sample is 153 participants (see Appendix D).
This study uses a web-hosted questionnaire to survey generational employee’s work habits. The questionnaire was developed using scales for each variable that demonstrated acceptable reliability in prior use. All responses to measured variables are on a 7-point Likert scale. Access to the survey is by Weblink, and all participants must first agree to participate after receiving informed consent before access to the study is granted.
All variables are operationalized using previously validated scales. Appendix B depicts all scale questions. The complete survey is in Appendix A.
Generations
Generations are measured by birth year range. The grouping variable is formed by proxy with the range year aligning with a particular generation. Participants born between 1946 and 1964 are categorized as Baby Boomers. Participants born between 1965 and 1979 are categorized as Generation X. Participants born between 1980 and 1994 are classified as Millennials. Participants born between 2005 and 2012 are categorized as Generation Z.
Work Engagement
Work engagement is a positive, fulfilling, affective-motivational state of work-related well-being that can be seen as the antipode of job 1burnout. Engaged employees have high energy levels and are enthusiastically involved (Bakker, Schaufeli, Leiter, & Taris, 2008). It is operationalized using a six-question scale developed by Smith (2006). The scale demonstrated a reliability of .73 Cronbach’s Alpha
Infers people’s pleasure while communicating online and in social networks (Chen, Teo, & Nguyen, 2019; Ku et al., 2013a; Pai & Arnott, 2013). One of the main goals behind the use of SNS is to have fun and good experiences while interacting with others in an online community (Hsu, Tien, Lin, & Chang, 2015; Jackson & Wang, 2013; Ryan et al., 2014; Zolkepli et al., 2015). It has been demonstrated that joyless individuals are unlikely to participate in a social networking community and online communication environment. The literature has confirmed that individuals enjoy themselves while using online media. This fact does much to explain why so many people all around the world have embraced social networking so wholly and quickly (Pew Research, 2015). These intentions are sustainable to use social networking sites scale were adapted from (Cheung & Lee, 2010). Some scholars (Hsu et al., 2007; Ku et al., 2013b; Lin et al., 2011) reveal users look for sensory stimulation while using social networking sites for social interactions and when seeking information about products or services (Chen, 2018). The gratification of using an excellent social networking site often helps a person overcome a lousy mood and reduce stress.
Communication can be defined as the process of transmitting information and common understanding from one person to another (Keyton, 2011). It is the creation or exchange of thoughts, ideas, emotions, and knowledge between sender(s) and receiver(s). It is essential to building and maintaining relationships in the workplace. However, communication does not occur until information and understanding have passed between the sender and the intended receiver.
Counterproductive workplace behavior and deviant behavior usually include the qualifying element of “intentional action,” and the definition of cyberloafing usually consists of the qualifying element of “voluntary action.” Unlike the stance taken by scholars of counterproductive workplace behavior, we do not categorize avoidance coping behaviors, such as distracting one’s attention by surfing the internet, as cyberloafing because these actions are usually not intentionally meant to impact the organization negatively (cf. Motowidlo et al., 2013). Instead, we view it as a form of unconscious self-therapy. This perspective of cyberloafing has important academic and managerial implications.
Information is essential because organizations that effectively share information show higher productivity levels (Darr et al., 1995). Regarding workplace learning activities, sharing information is necessary to support learning success. Information, on the other hand, is influenced by two factors. First, it depends on the available ways to share information. Second, the willingness of a person to pass on information has to be considered. The two most common ways to share information are face-to-face or via electronic media.
Peer Pressure is “insistence whereas group encouragement for an individual to be involved in a group activity in a particular way” (Santor, Messervey, & Kusumakar, 2000). In other words, it is the intentional or unintentional force that group members impose on the other members, encouraging them to act or react similarly. Peer pressure is more common among youngsters who tend to associate with the same group of people over a long period.
Work-Related Social Media Use
Social media use has become a dispensable part of knowledge work. Employees posting work-related content on social media are considered credible sources of information and are essential for how stakeholders, such as potential customers and future employees, perceive the organization. Therefore, employees’ ability to communicate on social media has become a competitive advantage for individual employees and their organizations, especially in the professional service sector. Hence, understanding the role of employees’ ability to use these social media professionally is crucial for understanding the communicative behaviors of contemporary knowledge workers.
Social Media Use
is defined as “a group of internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technical foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content” (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). Social media includes many online information sources created, circulated, and used by consumers to educate one another about products, services, and brands available in the marketplace (Murugesan, 2007). Social media is a communication mechanism that allows users to communicate with thousands, and perhaps billions, of individuals worldwide (Williams et al., 2012). The basic premise of the uses and gratifications theory is that individuals seek out media among competitors that fulfills their needs and leads to ultimate gratifications (Lariscy et al., 2011).
Table 2: Table of Variables
| Variables | Variable Type | Operational Definitions | Measured by | Reliability |
| Generations (Gen) | Grouping
Variable |
1. Baby boomers (age 54-73);
2. Gen X (age 42-53); 3. Millennials (age 24-41); and 4. Gen Z (age 18-23) |
Year of birth, i.e., What year you were born. | |
| Work Engagement
(WE) |
Dependent Variable | Positive, fulfilling, affective-motivational state of work-related well-being characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption. | Operationalized as a 9-question scale developed by Schaufeli, Bakker & Salanova (2006) | Cronbach alpha
0.85 |
| Entertainment Value
(EV) |
Moderator
|
Refers to the pleasure people experience when communicating with others through online social networks.
|
Operationalized as a 7-question scale developed by Abbas Naqvi (2019) | Cronbach alpha
0.82 |
| Work-Related Communication
(WR COM) |
Dependent Variable | as communicative acts in which employees share information about their work, organizations, professions, and industries through publicly available platforms (i.e., Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook), typically through individually owned accounts.
|
Operationalized as a 5-question scale developed by Van Deursen, Verlage, & Van Laar, (2019) | Cronbach alpha
0.82 |
Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU)
|
Independent Variable | Disengagement from work tasks is usually deemed a counterproductive work behavior detrimental to an employee’s productivity. | Operationalized as a 7-question scale developed by Syrek, Kühnelb, Vahle-Hinzc & De Bloom (2017) | Cronbach alpha
0.93 |
| Information Sharing
(IS) |
Mediator | It is the knowledge exchange among individuals, teams, units, or organizations. | Operationalized as a 5-question scale developed by Chai, Das, & Rao (2011)
|
Cronbach alpha
0.92 |
| Peer Pressure
(PP) |
Moderator | Peer pressure influences a peer group, observers, or individuals who encourage others to change their attitudes, values, or behavior to conform to groups. | Operationalized as a 4-question scale developed by Adimora, Akaneme & Aye (2018)
|
Cronbach alpha
0.81 |
Work-Related Social Media Use (WRSMU)
|
Independent Variable | It is defined as using public social media accounts owned by individual employees to produce or consume work-related information. | Operationalized as a 5-question scale developed by Zoonen, Verhoeven,
Vliegenthart (2016)
|
Composite Reliability
0.86 |
| Social Media Use
(SMU) |
Moderator | Social media refers to “the websites and online tools that facilitate interactions between users by providing them opportunities to share information, opinions, and interests.”
|
Operationalized as a 4-question scale developed by Dragana, Sikandar, Vela, Ahmed, and Feng. (2021). | Composite Reliability
0.857 |
Gender is measured as male or female. The data is collected as work-related behaviors may differ by gender.
Outcome variable. The previous study had two crucial outcomes: employee engagement and employee productivity. Experts have defined employee engagement as having three determining factors: vigor, absorption, and dedication (Schaufeli et al., 2002). As noted in Chapter 2, employee engagement has significant implications for the success of an organization. We will add the gender of the employee and their position within the organization (i.e., supervisor, employee, or manager). Employees’ commitment and strength in an organization can play a part in its success or failure. In the present study, employee engagement represented the dependent variable for the overall research. Similarly, employee productivity acts as another dependent variable for the task. These employees’ performance rates can determine an organization’s success and failure.
The letter of informed consent and participants survey will be web-hosted on SurveyMonkey. The invitation to participate and Weblink will be provided to eligible participants by a third-party collector (Amazon Mechanical TURK). The researcher will have a 3rd party online host to collect, ensuring transparency between the researcher and the participants.
A small group of five individuals took the planned survey and provided personal feedback on the study’s clarity and functionality before actual data collection.
Data analysis was completed using partial lease squared structural equation modeling using SmartPLS.
After downloading the data, the dataset was cleaned to remove invalid cases and replace any missing data. Invalid cases were those with insufficient data to measure each of the constructs in the model. Missing items were then handled through imputation with the series mean.
Measurement Model
The cleaned dataset was imported to SmartPLS for statistical analysis. Before structural analysis, sample descriptives were compiled, and the PLS Algorithm was evaluated as a measurement model to validate the measures of reflective constructs in the model. Items with factor loadings below 0.4 were removed. Items with factor loadings between 0.4 and 0.7 were retained if the construct AVE exceeds 0.5. Items with factor loadings above 0.7 were retained. Cronbach’s Alpha or Composite Reliability values above 0.7 will assess internal consistency reliability. Convergent validity will be evaluated by AVE above 0.5. Fornell-Larcker Criterion and Heterotrait-Monotratit Ratio (HTMT) values will be assessed to determine discriminant validity. Final construct descriptives will be tabulated after the valid and reliable model measures.
Structural Model
The structural model will be evaluated by bootstrapping to assess relationships between constructs. The structural model will undergo evaluation using bootstrapping to examine the connections between constructs and hypotheses. Bivariate relationships will be deemed significant if the p-value is below <0.05. Path coefficients, effect size, and the overall model coefficient of determination (R Square) will be utilized to characterize the nature of these significant relationships. Mediation will be assessed by analyzing indirect effects and comparing unmediated and mediated relationships between independent and dependent variables using path coefficient and total indirect effect tables. Moderation will be tested with a significance level of p<0.05, and if found significant, the nature of moderation will be evaluated through path coefficient analysis and simple slope analysis. Furthermore, a multigroup analysis will identify substantial differences in modeled relationships based on grouping variables.
Table 3: Statistical Analysis Metrics
| Measurement Model | Test | Purpose | Acceptable values |
| Unidimensionality/indicator reliability | Factor loadings | Indicator Validity | 0.7 or higher 0.4 – 0.7 if AVE >0.5 |
| Internal consistency reliability | Cronbach’s alpha (CA) or Composite reliability (CR) | Scale Reliability | 0.7 or higher |
| Convergent reliability | Average variance extracted (AVE) | Construct Validity | 0.5 or higher |
| Discriminant validity | Fornell-Larker criterion | The measure does not correlate with another construct | AVE of each construct should be higher than the squared correlation with any other construct |
| Discriminant validity | Hetertrait-mono ratio of correlations (HTMT) | The measure does not correlate with another construct | < 0.9 |
| Structural Model | Test | Purpose | Acceptable values |
| Significance | Probability (p-value) | Probability of the observed relationship occurring by chance | < 0.05 |
| Path coefficient | Effect size | Indicates the slope and strength of the relationship | small (>0.02) medium (>0.15) large (>0.35) |
| Explained variance | The squared coefficient of determination (R2) | Variance in the DV explained by the net effects of all predictors | substantial (>0.67) moderate (>0.33) weak (>0.19) |
The data collection for this study focuses on demographics, explicitly targeting the most active social media users. As Generation Z and other cohorts, such as millennials and baby boomers, increasingly assume roles in today’s industries, organizations are encountering a workforce that naturally and extensively utilizes social media. Consequently, there is a pressing need for a deeper comprehension of leveraging the advantages of social media and establishing the most conducive environment for its effective utilization within these organizations.
This study has certain limitations that should be acknowledged. Firstly, while the respondents were from three different knowledge-intensive organizations in the professional service sector and our findings were consistent across these organizations, it is essential to exercise caution in generalizing the results until further research is conducted in additional organizational and cultural settings. Secondly, the cross-sectional research design prevents us from making any causal inferences. For example, while more frequent social media use may increase social media self-efficacy, future research could explore these relationships over time or use experimental methods to establish causal connections in our model. Thirdly, although this study examined the impact of employees’ social media use and self-efficacy on social media awareness, we lack information on how proficiently employees perform online (as evaluated by their managers or peers). Incorporating multi-sourced data, such as performance ratings by peers or mixed-method designs, could further enrich our understanding of social media use for work and broaden our methodological approaches (e.g., by investigating actual social media content combined with survey data as suggested by Van Zoonen & Treem, 2019), as well as expand our methodological repertoire (as indicated by Leonardi & Vaast, 2017).
Social media are reflection tools to record a particular user base’s moment. Yet, social media are also products created by their respective corporations with the intent of monetizing our labor (i.e., posts, comments, “likes,” and content we make) through market research, advertisements, or our content (Facebook, 2013; Tumblr, 2014; Twitter, 2014; YouTube, 2010). For all our hopes and fears about what social media are or could be, they are, first and foremost, products or websites designed to monetize us in some form or another (Fish & McKnight, 2014; Gillespie, 2014). Perhaps this is the crux of what we should hope social media never become—a way for corporate actors merely to collect the most sensitive information about us so that we may be advertised to. The emphasis of my claim is on the word “merely.” We cannot fully control how corporate actors use our information all of the time. Since there is the implicit deal that these “free” services come at a cost to our privacy. We can at least extract social and cultural benefits from social media use, assuming that advertising has no social or cultural good. In a way, the perception we tend to have about social media mirrors and reflects what the perception of television offered us a generation ago (Hilliard, 1958). Social media can be an educator, an equalizer, an exploiter, a social unifier, a social divider, and so on. Of course, social media is a form that affords some positive uses and questionable actions. Social media can be all of these and none of these at once. Our task as a society is to ensure that some of their uses enable social media to be refractions, tools to record a particular user base’s moment in time.
At the same time, we are avoiding to the extent that we can our unfettered exploitation by capital, declaring no potential conflicts of interest concerning this article’s research, authorship, and publication. Yet, social media are also products created by their respective corporations with the intent of monetizing our labor (i.e., posts, comments, “likes,” and content we make) through market research, advertisements, or our content (Facebook, 2013; Tumblr, 2014; Twitter, 2014; YouTube, 2010). For all our hopes and fears about what social media are or could be, they are, first and foremost, products or websites designed to monetize us in some form or another (Fish & McKnight, 2014)
IRB approval is required before data collection. All participants will be provided a letter of informed consent before agreeing to participate. Participants may withdraw from the study at any time. No personal identifying information is collected.
Chapter 4: Data Analysis and Results
After downloading the data, the dataset was checked for invalid cases requiring removal, and any missing data in the valid instances were treated. Invalid cases are those that need more data to measure each of the constructs in the model. All cases were complete and valid, and no data were missing. Through error, four of the five indicators for Information Sharing were not included in the survey; therefore, the remaining item was used as a single indicator. After computing the sample descriptions, the dataset was uploaded to SmartPLS Version 4 for analysis.
The sample exhibits five dominant characteristics. These were the age bracket, year of birth (age), employment industry, how long in current jobs, and how many social networks they are on.
Table 4: Descriptives of Sample
| Demographic | Characteristic | Frequency | Percent | National Estimate |
| Age Group (N=274) |
18-23 |
20 |
7% |
|
| 24-41 | 148 | 54% | ||
| 42-53 | 57 | 21% | ||
| 54-73 | 46 | 17% | ||
| Above 73 | 3 | 1% | ||
| Generation (N=274) |
Gen Z |
24 |
9% |
|
| Millennial | 145 | 53% | ||
| Gen X | 60 | 22% | ||
| Baby Boomer
Other |
45
0 |
16%
0% |
||
| Social Media Networks (N=274) |
1 |
19 |
7% |
|
| 2 | 38 | 14% | ||
| 3 | 58 | 21% | ||
| 4 | 63 | 23% | ||
| More than 4 | 96 | 35% | ||
| Years of Experience (N=274) |
0-1 Year |
57 |
21% |
|
| 1-3 Years | 60 | 22% | ||
| 3-5 Years | 55 | 20% | ||
| 5-10 Years | 53 | 19% | ||
| More than 10 Years | 49 | 18% |
The measurement model was tested to ensure that all measures were valid and reliable. All factor loadings were acceptable. The average Variance Extracted (AVE) was above the 0.50 threshold, indicating good convergent validity. Scale reliability was above 0.7 for all scales, and discriminant validity was satisfactory. The specific values are listed in Tables 12–15.
Table 5: Measured Variable Factor Loading and Scale Reliability
| Variable | Item | Factor Loading | Composite Reliability | Variable | Item | Factor Loading | Scale Reliability |
| Entertainment Value | 1 | 0.918 | 0.935 | Work Engagement | 1 | 0.761 | 0.94 |
| 2 | 0.936 | 2 | 0.83 | ||||
| 3 | 0.917 | 3 | 0.726 | ||||
| 4 | 0.755 | 4 | 0.864 | ||||
| 5 | 0.92 | ||||||
| Information Sharing | 1 | 1.0 | 6 | 0.639 | |||
| 7 | 0.901 | ||||||
| Non-Work-Related Social Media Use | 1 | 0.738 | 0.857 | 8 | 0.847 | ||
| 2 | 0.838 | ||||||
| 3 | 0.751 | Work-Related Communication | 1 | 0.838 | 0.886 | ||
| 4 | 0.765 | 3 | 0.839 | ||||
| 5 | 0.589 | 4 | 0.774 | ||||
| 5 | 0.671 | ||||||
| Peer Pressure | 1 | 0.734 | 0.748 | 6 | 0.773 | ||
| 3 | 0.793 | ||||||
| 4 | 0.579 | Work-Related Social Media Use | 1 | 0.839 | 0.951 | ||
| 2 | 0.93 | ||||||
| Social Media Use | 1 | 0.833 | 0.913 | 3 | 0.925 | ||
| 2 | 0.863 | 4 | 0.919 | ||||
| 3 | 0.877 | 5 | 0.846 | ||||
| 4 | 0.833 |
Table 6: Construct Reliability and Convergent Validity
| Cronbach’s Alpha | Composite Reliability | Average Variance Extracted (AVE) | |
| Entertainment Value | 0.905 | 0.935 | 0.783 |
| Non-Work-Related Social Media Use | 0.795 | 0.857 | 0.549 |
| Peer Pressure | 0.524 | 0.748 | 0.501 |
| Social Media Use | 0.878 | 0.913 | 0.725 |
| Work Engagement | 0.927 | 0.94 | 0.666 |
| Work-Related Communication | 0.838 | 0.886 | 0.61 |
| Work-Related Social Media Use | 0.936 | 0.951 | 0.797 |
Table 7: Discriminant Validity (Fornell-Larcker Criterion)
| Discriminant Validity
Fornell-Larcker Criterion
|
Entertainment Value | Information Sharing | NWRSMU
|
Peer Pressure
|
Social Media Use | Work Engagement
|
Work-Related Communication
|
Work-Related Social Media Use |
| Entertainment Value | 0.885 | |||||||
| Information Sharing | 0.435 | 1.00 | ||||||
| NWRSMU | 0.368 | 0.314 | 0.741 | |||||
| Peer Pressure | 0.283 | 0.393 | 0.203 | 0.708 | ||||
| Social Media Use | 0.71 | 0.437 | 0.407 | 0.177 | 0.851 | |||
| Work Engagement | 0.251 | 0.178 | 0.174 | 0.238 | 0.147 | 0.816 | ||
| Work-Related Comm | 0.309 | 0.274 | 0.122 | 0.313 | 0.217 | 0.611 | 0.781 | |
| Work-Related Social Media Use | 0.29 | 0.553 | 0.251 | 0.472 | 0.269 | 0.372 | 0.273 | 0.898 |
Table 8: Discriminant Validity (Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio – HTMT)
| Heterotrait-Monotrait
Ratio
HTMT |
Entertainment Value | Information Sharing | NWRSMU
|
Peer Pressure
|
Social Media Use | Work Engagement
|
Work-Related Communication
|
Work-Related Social Media Use | Peer Pressure X NWRSMU | SMU x NWR SMU | Peer Pressure X WRSMU | Entertainment Value X NWRSMU |
| EV | ||||||||||||
| IS | 0.46 | |||||||||||
| NWRSMU | 0.442 | 0.356 | ||||||||||
| PP | 0.351 | 0.518 | 0.33 | |||||||||
| SMU | 0.789 | 0.457 | 0.497 | 0.24 | ||||||||
| WE | 0.264 | 0.174 | 0.187 | 0.31 | 0.15 | |||||||
| WRC | 0.356 | 0.297 | 0.144 | 0.418 | 0.249 | 0.688 | ||||||
| WRSMU | 0.318 | 0.572 | 0.293 | 0.695 | 0.279 | 0.388 | 0.306 | |||||
| PP X NWRSMU | 0.048 | 0.067 | 0.069 | 0.269 | 0.056 | 0.171 | 0.107 | 0.248 | ||||
| SMU X NWRSMU | 0.14 | 0.015 | 0.102 | 0.068 | 0.202 | 0.048 | 0.064 | 0.048 | 0.349 | |||
| PP X WRSMU | 0.204 | 0.177 | 0.241 | 0.525 | 0.091 | 0.179 | 0.152 | 0.388 | 0.644 | 0.153 | ||
| EV X NWRSMU | 0.107 | 0.028 | 0.062 | 0.073 | 0.158 | 0.034 | 0.027 | 0.074 | 0.047 | 0.798 | 0.296 |
EV stands for entertainment value; IS stands for information sharing; NWRSMU stands for non-work-related social media use; PP stands for peer pressure; SMU stands for social media use; WE stands for work engagement; WRC stands for work-related communications; and ENT stands for entertainment value.
All the correlations were significantly lower than 1.00.
* Significant at p =0.05.
The constructs were dependent variables: relationships, communication, entertainment, and information.
Table 9: Construct and Variable Descriptives and Normality
| Variable | Mean | Minimum | Maximum | Std. Deviation | Skewness | Kurtosis | Overserved |
| EV | 4.551 | 1.00 | 7.00 | 1.153 | -0272 | 0.574 | 274 |
| IS | 3.398 | 1.00 | 7.00 | 1.506 | 0.165 | -0.423 | 274 |
| NWRSMU | 3.901 | 1.00 | 7.00 | 1.247 | -0.24 | 0.076 | 274 |
| PP | 3.263 | 1.00 | 7.00 | 0.607 | -0.147 | 1.016 | 274 |
| SMU | 4.534 | 1.00 | 7.00 | 1.43 | -0.399 | -0.215 | 274 |
| WE | 4.088 | 1.00 | 7.00 | 1.214 | -0.158 | -0.215 | 274 |
| WRC | 4.747 | 1.16 | 7.00 | 0.978 | -0.339 | 1.439 | 274 |
| WRSMU | 2.464 | 1.00 | 7.00 | 1.417 | 0.878 | -0.003 | 274 |
EV stands for entertainment value; IS stands for information sharing; NWRSMU stands for non-work-related social media use; PP stands for peer pressure; SMU stands for social media use; WE stands for work engagement; WRC stands for work-related communications; and ENT stands for entertainment value.
All the correlations were significantly lower than 1.00.
* Significant at p =0.05.
After validating the measurement model, structural equation modeling was used to test all the hypotheses.
H1. The NWRSMU was positively correlated with WE.
The hypothesis that Non-Work-Related Social Media Use and Work Engagement affect the relationship between Work-Related Social Media Use (WRSMU) and Work Engagement (WE) was insufficient. The p-value was more significant than .05, and the null hypothesis was not supported.
H2. WRSMU positively correlated with WE.
The hypothesis that work-related social media use and Work Engagement affect the relationship between work-related social media use (WRSMU) and work engagement (WE) was sufficient. The p-value was less than .001, and the coefficient was 0.36. This showed an increase in work-related social media use and work engagement. Thus, the null hypothesis was supported.
| Hypothesis | Sig. | Path Coefficient | P- Values | Finding | |
| H1 | NWRSMU-> Work Engagement (WE) | >0.05 | 0.105 | 0.069 | Not Supported |
| H2 | WRSMU is positively related to Workplace Engagement (WE). | < 0.001 | 0.36 | <0.001 | Supported |
Once all bivariate relationships are reported, the next step is to report the results of the multivariate analyses (mediation and moderation).
H3. Peer Pressure moderates the relationship between WRSMU and WE.
The hypothesis that peer pressure moderates the relationship between Work-Related Social Media Use (WRSMU) and Work Engagement (WE) was tested using bootstrap moderation and simple slope analyses. The p-value of 0.397 was not statistically significant; therefore, the null hypothesis was accepted, and the alternate hypothesis was not supported. However, evaluation of the simple slope demonstrated a moderate effect at higher values of Work-Related Social Media Use (WRSMU) and Work Engagement (WE).
Figure 5. Hypothesis 3 – Peer Pressure x Work-Related Social Media Use
H4. Peer Pressure moderates the relationship between NWRSMU and WE
The relationship between age and Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSU) variables had to be analyzed to test this hypothesis. This was done to ascertain whether the users used social media because they were influenced by age. The more people of a certain age engage in Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU), the more it can be inferred that peer pressure has a negative relationship with Work Engagement (WE). The coefficient for age and relationship was -0.004, while that for age and entertainment was -0.010. Therefore, as age increases, non-work-related social media use (NWRSMU) decreases, meaning that as people age, they reduce their use of social media for non-work-related purposes. However, the coefficients are small, indicating a weak relationship. Age has a reduced effect on the relationship between Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) and Work Engagement (WE). In this case, the null hypothesis is true.
Figure 6. Hypothesis 4 – Peer Pressure x Work-Related Social Media Use
H5. EV moderates the relationship between NWRSMU and WE
Statistics prove that entertainment value moderates the relationship between Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) and Work Engagement (WE) because entertainment is a Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU). The coefficient value for entertainment and work engagement is 0.047, which indicates that for every unit increase in entertainment, there is a 0.047 increase in work engagement, with an R2 of 0.182. The relationship between Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) and Work Engagement (WE) is affected by entertainment because its input affects the results of the final relationship. The coefficient for Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) and Work Engagement (WE) is 0.153, which indicates a moderation or reduction in that relationship when entertainment is introduced. When users use social media for entertainment, they do not engage in work-related activities; however, the coefficient values show that they are more involved in the workplace. Thus, this hypothesis was confirmed.
Figure 7. Hypothesis 5 – Entertainment Value x Non-Work-Related Social Media Use
H6. WR Stress moderates the relationship between NWRSMU and WE
To reduce stress, workers must engage in entertainment activities. The more they engage in entertainment, the more they escape stress. Engaging in entertainment activities or Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) depends on the worker’s stress levels. The coefficient for entertainment and work engagement was 0.047, indicating that the two are positively related. The hypothesis is thus true that stress is a moderator between Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) and Work Engagement (WE).
Figure 8. Hypothesis 6 – Social Media Use X Non-Work-Related Social Media Use
| Hypothesis | Sig. | Path Coefficient | P- Values | Finding | ||
| H4 | Peer Pressure moderates the relationship between NWRSMU and WE | >0.05 | 0.1 | 0.146 | Not Supported | |
| * Even though none were supported, there were still exciting moderation effects in the Simple Slope Analysis | ||||||
| H6 | Social Meda Use x Non-Work Related Social Media Use -> Work Engagement | < 0.001 | 0.076 | 0.329 | Not Supported | |
| H3 | Peer Pressure x Work-Related Social Media Use -> Work Engagement | -0.042 | 0.397 | Not Supported | ||
| H5 | Entertainment Value x Non-Work-Related Social Media Use -> Work Engagement | -0.104 | 0.218 | Not Supported | ||
H7. IS mediates the relationship between WRSMU and WE.
The hypothesis that IS mediates the relationship between Work-Related Social Media Use (WRSMU) and Work Engagement (WE) was tested using path analysis to determine the indirect effect. A p-value of <0.009 supported a significant mediation effect. However, a path coefficient of -0.089 indicated that the effect size was insignificant. The mediated relationship between Work-Related Social Media Use (WRSMU) and Work Engagement (WE) was significant at < 0.001, with a path coefficient of 0.296; thus, the mediation was partial.
H8. WR Com mediates the relationship between WRSMU and WE
The coefficient between Work-Related Social Media Use (WRSMU) and Work Engagement (WE) is 0.263 (p-value <0.001), thus indicating a positive relationship. When Work-Related Communication (WR Com) was factored out, we considered the effect of information alone on Work-Related Social Media Use (WRSMU). The coefficient of information and Work Engagement (WE) is 0.296, indicating a solid mediation of Work-Related Communication (WR Com) on the relationship between Work-Related Social Media Use (WRSMU) and Work Engagement (WE). The R-value was 0.91, showing a 91% variance in Work Engagement (WE).
| Hypothesis | Sig. | Path Coefficient | P- Values | Finding | |
| H7 | Work-Related Social Media Use -> Information Sharing -> Work Engagement | >0.05 | 0.089 | 0.009 | Supported – Partial |
| Mediated Bivariate | |||||
| Work-Related Social Media Use -> Work Engagement | 0.296 | 0 | Supported – Partial | ||
| H8 | Work-Related Social Media Use -> Work-Related Communication -> Work Engagement | < 0.001 | 0.153 | 0 | Supported – Partial |
| Mediated Bivariate | |||||
| Non-Work Related Social Media Use -> Work Engagement | 0.105 | 0.069 | Supported – Partial | ||
H9. The influence of social media use on (WE) differs by generation.
Multigroup analysis revealed no significant differences by generational group in the relationship between social media use and work engagement. However, there was a considerable difference between Baby Boomers and Millennials regarding the negative relationship between Work-Related Communication. Millennials demonstrated a more positive path coefficient (-0.19) than baby boomers (-0.493), whereas H9 was unsupported, other than that relationship.
| Hypothesis | Path
Coefficient Difference |
P – Values | Finding |
| H9 | Work-Related Communication on Work Engagement (Baby Boomers Compared to Millennials) | -0.493 | 0.025 | Supported |
Figure 9. Structural Model Analysis Results
Figure 10. Multigroup Analysis
Figure 11. Multigroup Analysis-A
| Baby Boomers (54-73)
vs Millennials (24-41) p-value |
Gen X
(42-53) vs. Millennials (24-41) p-value |
1-Tailored
Baby Boomers (54-73) vs Millennials (24-41) p-value |
1-Tailored
Gen X (42-53) vs Millennials (24-41) p-value |
2-Tailored
Baby Boomers (54-73) vs Millennials (24-41) p-value |
2-Tailored
Gen X (42-53) vs Millennials (24-41) p-value |
|
| NWRSMU->WE | 0.193 | 0.151 | 0.189 | 0.196 | 0.378 | 0.391 |
| SMU->WE | 0.386 | 0.197 | 0.081 | 0.174 | 0.163 | 0.348 |
| WRC->WE | -0.493 | -0.19 | 0.987 | 0.915 | 0.025 | 0.169 |
| WRSMU->WE | 0.257 | 0.144 | 0.094 | 0.215 | 0.188 | 0.432 |
EV stands for entertainment value; IS stands for information sharing; NWRSMU stands for non-work-related social media use; PP stands for peer pressure; SMU stands for social media use; WE stands for work engagement; WRC stands for work-related communications; and ENT stands for entertainment value.
Figure 12. Multigroup Analysis-B
| Baby Boomers (54-73)
vs Gen X (42-53) p-value |
1-Tailored
Baby Boomers (54-73) vs Gen X (42-53) p-value |
2-Tailored
Baby Boomers (54-73) vs Gen X (42-53) p-value |
|
| NWRSMU->WE | 0.042 | 0.464 | 0.929 |
| SMU->WE | 0.19 | 0.248 | 0.496 |
| WRSMU->WE | 0.113 | 0.313 | 0.625 |
Evaluation of Findings
The findings show that social media influences work engagement, depending on age. The findings from the concurrent hypothesis leading to H9 confirmed that social media affects workplace engagement. This also shows that younger people are more involved in social media, leading to low work engagement. This finding is consistent with multiple results that analyzed the relationship between social media use among Gen Zs and their work engagement.
Overview
This chapter thoroughly discusses the study’s findings based on the problem statement, research purpose, and overarching research questions. The analysis was structured around each research question, offering a detailed interpretation of the results. The chapter further explores the study’s implications for theory, practice, and future research and finally provides conclusions while summarizing key takeaways.
In the contemporary digital age, social media platforms have become ubiquitous in both personal and professional spheres. As a result, organizations increasingly recognize the potential impact of social media use (SMU) on employee engagement. Workplace engagement is essential for organizational success, defined as the extent to which employees are committed to and enthusiastic about their work. This paper examines the relationship between SMU and workplace engagement, exploring how the use of social media in the workplace can positively and negatively affect employee engagement.
Positive Influences of SMU on WE
Negative Influences of SMU on WE
Moderating Factors
The relationship between SMU and WE is complex and influenced by various moderating factors, including:
Social media use in the workplace can positively and negatively influence employee engagement. By understanding the benefits and risks associated with SMU and implementing appropriate policies and practices, organizations can harness the power of social media to foster employee connectedness, knowledge sharing, and recognition while mitigating potential distractions and privacy concerns. Through careful management and moderation, organizations can optimize the impact of SMU on workplace engagement, enhancing employee motivation, productivity, and organizational success.
Social media has transformed the way we communicate, collaborate, and share information. However, using social media in the workplace can also lead to distractions, decreased productivity, and potential security risks. This paper explores the influence of peer pressure on social media use in the workplace and its implications for employee behavior, productivity, and organizational Culture.
To understand the impact of peer pressure on social media use in the workplace, we will draw upon two fundamental theories:
Social Learning Theory (SLT) posits that individuals learn from observing others’ behaviors, attitudes, and outcomes. In the context of social media use in the workplace, employees may be influenced by their peers’ social media habits, leading to increased or decreased use of social media platforms.
Social Identity Theory (SIT) suggests that individuals derive a sense of self from group memberships. Employees may feel a sense of belonging and identity through social media interactions with colleagues, which can increase their use of social media to maintain and strengthen social bonds.
To investigate the influence of peer pressure on social media use in the workplace, we will conduct a mixed-methods study, combining quantitative and qualitative research methods. The study will involve a survey of employees from various organizations, followed by in-depth interviews with a subset of survey respondents.
The survey will consist of questions designed to measure the extent of social media use in the workplace, the influence of peer pressure on social media use, and the perceived impact of social media use on productivity and organizational Culture. The survey will be distributed to diverse employees across different industries and job roles.
A subset of respondents will be selected for in-depth interviews after the survey. These interviews will explore the experiences and perceptions of employees regarding the influence of peer pressure on social media use in the workplace, as well as the potential consequences of this behavior on productivity and organizational Culture.
The survey and interviews will be analyzed to identify patterns and trends in the data. We anticipate that the findings will reveal the following:
This study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of peer pressure’s influence on social media use in the workplace and its implications for employee behavior, productivity, and organizational Culture. By combining quantitative and qualitative research methods, we hope to shed light on the complex interplay between social media use, peer pressure, and workplace dynamics. The findings of this study can inform the development of policies and interventions aimed at promoting responsible social media use in the workplace and maximizing its potential benefits while minimizing its possible drawbacks.
Employees spend more time on social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram for personal reasons. While Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) has the potential to enhance workplace engagement (WE) by providing opportunities for social interaction and information sharing, it can also be a source of distraction and conflict.
Entertainment value (EV) is a critical factor that influences the relationship between Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) and Workplace Engagement (WE). Entertainment value (EV) refers to how social media content is perceived as enjoyable, engaging, and rewarding. When social media content has high Entertainment value (EV), it is more likely to capture employees’ attention and encourage them to engage. Conversely, when social media content has low Entertainment value (EV), it is less likely to hold employees’ interest and may lead to adverse outcomes such as disengagement.
Several studies have investigated the relationship between Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) and Workplace Engagement (WE). Some studies have found that Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) can have a positive relationship with WE. In contrast, other studies have found that Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) can negatively affect Workplace Engagement (WE). The conflicting results of these studies suggest that the relationship between Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) and Workplace Engagement (WE) is complex and may be influenced by several factors, including Entertainment value (EV).
For example, a study by Kim and Leung (2017) found that Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) was positively related to Workplace Engagement (WE) when the social media content had high Entertainment value (EV). The authors argued that high Entertainment value (EV) content can help employees relax, de-stress, and connect with others, leading to increased workplace engagement (WE).
In contrast, a study by Wang and Hu (2016) found that Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) was negatively related to Workplace Engagement (WE) when the social media content had low Entertainment value (EV). The authors argued that low Entertainment value (EV) content can distract and interfere with employees’ work performance, leading to decreased Workplace Engagement (WE).
Our findings have important implications for organizations. Organizations should be aware of the potential impact of Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) on Workplace Engagement (WE) and take steps to encourage employees to use social media productively and beneficially. For example, organizations can provide employees with training on using social media effectively and create policies that encourage employees to use social media for work-related purposes.
While social media can positively affect workplace productivity and collaboration, it can also be a source of stress for employees. This research paper examines the influence of work-related stress on the relationship between non-workplace social media use, Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU), and Workplace Engagement (WE).
Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) refers to using social media platforms outside work hours for non-work-related purposes. Studies have shown that Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) can positively and negatively affect workplace outcomes. On the one hand, it can enhance job satisfaction, reduce workplace isolation, and provide networking opportunities. On the other hand, excessive NWRSMU can lead to distractions, reduced work productivity, and sleep disturbances.
Workplace Engagement (WE)is a psychological state that involves feeling connected to, enthusiastic about, and committed to one’s work. Engaged employees are more productive, satisfied with their jobs, and less likely to leave their organizations.
Work-related stress is a significant problem in the workplace, costing organizations billions of dollars in lost productivity and absenteeism. Various factors, including excessive workload, unrealistic expectations, interpersonal conflicts, and job insecurity can cause stress.
Influence of Work-Related Stress on the Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU)- Workplace Engagement (WE) Relationship
It suggests that work-related stress can moderate the relationship between non-work-related social media use (NWRSMU) and workplace engagement (WE). Under high-stress conditions, employees are more likely to use social media as a coping mechanism to de-stress and escape from work. This can lead to increased Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU), negatively impacting workplace engagement (WE).
However, under conditions of low stress, Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) can have a more positive effect on workplace engagement (WE). Social media allows employees to connect with colleagues, share their perspectives, and seek support from others. This increased social support and connection can enhance workplace engagement.
Work-related stress can significantly influence the relationship between Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) and workplace engagement (WE). Under high-stress conditions, Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) can negatively impact workplace engagement (WE), as employees use it as a coping mechanism. However, under conditions of low stress, Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) can positively affect workplace engagement (WE), as it provides employees with opportunities for social support and connection. Organizations need to be aware of this complex relationship and take steps to mitigate the potential adverse effects of excessive Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU).
The workplace has undergone significant changes due to the advent of technology and the rise of social media. Information sharing (IS) and workplace social media use (WRSMU) have become integral parts of the contemporary work environment. This paper explores the relationship between IS, WRSMU, and workplace engagement (WE). It will examine the impact of these factors on employee productivity, job satisfaction, and overall organizational performance.
Section 1: Information Sharing and Workplace Engagement
Information sharing is critical to any organization, facilitating collaboration, knowledge transfer, and problem-solving. In the workplace context, IS can be defined as the process of exchanging, disseminating, and utilizing information among employees, teams, and departments. Research has shown that effective IS can increase workplace engagement, fostering a sense of belonging, trust, and collaboration among employees (Bock, Zmud, & Kim, 2005).
Section 2: Workplace Social Media Use and Workplace Engagement
Workplace social media use refers to utilizing social media platforms within the organizational context for professional purposes. WRSMU can take various forms, such as internal social networking sites, collaboration tools, and knowledge-sharing platforms. The use of social media in the workplace has been found to positively impact workplace engagement, as it promotes communication, collaboration, and knowledge sharing among employees (Kane, Fichman, & Gallaugher, 2014).
Section 3: The Interplay between Information Sharing, Workplace Social Media Use, and Workplace Engagement.
The relationship between Information Sharing (IS), Workplace Social Media Use (WRSMU), and Workplace Engagement (WE) is complex and multifaceted. On one hand, effective Information Sharing (IS) can lead to increased workplace engagement by promoting collaboration, knowledge sharing, and problem-solving. On the other hand, Workplace Social Media Use (WRSMU) can further enhance Information Sharing (IS) by providing employees with additional channels for communication and information exchange.
Research has shown that organizations that effectively combine Information Sharing (IS) and Workplace Social Media Use (WRSMU) can achieve higher levels of workplace engagement. For example, a study by Bock, Zmud, and Kim (2005) found that organizations that implemented both Information Sharing (IS) and Workplace Social Media Use (WRSMU) strategies experienced higher levels of employee satisfaction, commitment, and productivity.
The relationship between information sharing, workplace social media use, and workplace engagement is a critical factor in the success of modern organizations. By effectively combining (IS) and Workplace Social Media Use (WRSMU) strategies, organizations can foster a culture of collaboration, knowledge sharing, and employee engagement, ultimately leading to increased productivity, job satisfaction, and organizational performance. However, organizations must also address the challenges associated with these strategies and adopt best practices to ensure their successful implementation.
As different generations adopt and engage with social media in unique ways, it has become increasingly important to understand how these generational differences impact their well-being.
Distinct Social Media Usage Patterns Generations exhibit different patterns in their social media use. Millennials (born 1981-1996) and Generation Z (born 1997-2012) are known for being highly active on social media, using it for various purposes, including staying connected, sharing experiences, and self-expression. On the other hand, Baby Boomers (born 1946-1964) and Generation X (born 1965-1980) may be less frequent users and primarily use social media to connect with family and friends.
Impacts on Well-being are both positive and negative.
The Positive Effects are increased social connectedness, reduced loneliness and social isolation, access to information and resources, promotion of health literacy and well-being, and opportunities for self-expression and personal growth.
The Negative Effects are cyberbullying and online harassment, fear of missing out (FOMO), leading to anxiety and depression, Time displacement, reduced time spent on real-world activities, and Body image issues, particularly among younger users.
We found Generation-Specific Impacts:
Generation differences in social media use can have significant implications for well-being. By understanding these differences and considering moderating factors, individuals can harness the benefits of social media while mitigating its potential adverse effects. Promoting media literacy, fostering social support, and prioritizing self-care can create a positive and healthy social media environment for all generations.
Social media has become integral to our lives, particularly for younger generations. However, there are significant differences in how different generations use social media and its impact on their well-being. Understanding these differences is crucial for fostering healthy social media use and mitigating potential risks.
Generational Differences in Social Media Use are:
The impact of social media on well-being varies depending on the generation.
Generation differences in social media use and well-being highlight the complex relationship between technology and human behavior. By understanding these differences, we can foster healthy social media use, mitigate potential risks, and harness the positive benefits of social media for all generations.
The implications for theory arising from this study’s unexpected positive associations between Non-Work-Related Social Media Use (NWRSMU) and workplace engagement among Generation Z employees are profound. The conventional opinion has traditionally held that social media use for purposes other than work negatively correlates with workplace engagement. The study’s conclusions refute these theories and show that understanding the complex relationship between social media use and engagement among Generation Z workers requires a paradigm change. The positive correlation, especially regarding relationships and entertainment, questions the validity of current theories that primarily highlight the negative consequences of using social media for purposes other than work. A more complex theoretical framework is necessary because of the complex nature of social media interactions, which span both the personal and professional spheres. This pressures scholars and researchers to see beyond a one-dimensional viewpoint and accept that social media interactions outside the immediate work environment can provide employees with a sense of engagement and fulfillment.
The unexpectedly high positive coefficients for entertainment (0.047) and work engagement and relationships (0.266) imply that Gen Z workers might derive satisfaction and value from nonwork-related social media activities. The positive effect on workplace engagement suggests that entertainment and social interactions positively impact commitment and overall job satisfaction, even when unrelated to work. These findings further highlight the dynamic relationship between social media use and workplace engagement, highlighting the need for theories that consider variations based on demographic variables, such as age and generational traits. It is critical to acknowledge that Generation Z may view and interact with social media differently than previous generations to improve theoretical frameworks that better represent the complexity of modern workplace dynamics.
The study’s practical implications provide insights and guidance to organizations seeking to maximize the benefits of social media use on employee engagement in the workplace among Generation Z. First, businesses ought to acknowledge the possible advantages of social media interactions at the professional and personal levels. Companies can foster a positive social media environment that encourages positive interactions instead of viewing non-work-related activities as distractions. Organizations should consider adding entertainment to their social media strategies to increase workplace engagement. Acknowledging the beneficial correlation between entertainment-focused social media usage and job engagement, businesses may incorporate engaging and interactive content to promote feelings of camaraderie and contentment among staff members.
Furthermore, by comprehending the peer pressure dynamics that this study uncovered, organizations may use peer influence to encourage constructive social media behavior. Increased engagement and a sense of belonging may result from promoting helpful and cooperative peer interactions on social media platforms. Organizations should also continue to be flexible in accommodating the expectations and preferences of Generation Z workers regarding social media usage. Acknowledging the complex nature of social media interactions and providing for various uses, including work-related activities, can improve engagement and job satisfaction.
This study’s unexpected results highlight the complex nature of social media dynamics among Generation Z workers and call for more research. Subsequent investigations should clarify the specific content categories and actions on social media networks that foster workplace involvement. To better understand the relationship between social media use and workplace involvement outcomes, we can identify the elements that positively influence engagement and comprehend the subtleties of online interactions.
Researchers may use qualitative techniques, such as focus groups or in-depth interviews, to investigate these facets and gather detailed contextual information about workers’ experiences on social media. Combining qualitative narratives with quantitative findings could also provide a thorough understanding of mixed-method approaches. The study’s unexpected positive associations cast doubt on widely held beliefs and emphasize the necessity of reevaluating theory. Subsequent investigations should delve deeper into and formulate theories that accurately encapsulate the complex aspects of social media interactions and their influence on Generation Z’s workplace engagement.
The main advantages of this study are its robust quantitative analysis, sizable sample size, and the application of accepted theories as research guidelines. However, there are some drawbacks, such as the cross-sectional design, which makes it difficult to establish causality and rely on self-reported data. Future research may use longitudinal designs to track changes in social media engagement and use over time. Researchers should examine the moderating factors that might impact the relationships they find. A more complex understanding of the relationship between social media and engagement may result from investigating contextual elements such as organizational Culture or dynamics unique to a given industry. Furthermore, the validity of future research could be improved by addressing possible biases in self-reporting through creative methodologies or validation procedures.
It is recommended that future researchers investigate new trends and technologies found on social media platforms to gain a thorough understanding of how these factors affect workplace dynamics, particularly for Generation Z employees. A closer look at cutting-edge features, capabilities, and the dynamic nature of online interactions may help to clarify the complex connections between personal preferences, workplace culture, and social media use.
Future studies should use mixed-method approaches. In-depth interviews and focus groups are examples of qualitative methods that, combined with quantitative surveys, can yield a more comprehensive and contextualized understanding of how employees view and use social media. Qualitative insights can capture the subtleties of user motivation, preferred content, and social dynamics that affect engagement.
Future researchers should consider longitudinal designs to capture the temporal dynamics of social media use and its impact on workplace engagement to overcome this study’s limitations. Studies with a longitudinal design would allow monitoring alterations in social media usage and behavior over time, providing a more complex understanding of the causal relationships.
Researchers should also investigate potential moderating variables like organizational Culture, industry-specific factors, or individual differences to understand the contextual details influencing the observed relationships. This may offer insightful information about how social media affects workplace engagement differently in different contexts. Examining the possible effects of social media interventions in the workplace is the next logical step in this line of inquiry. Subsequent research endeavors may involve testing focused interventions designed to maximize social media usage for augmenting involvement. Assessing the efficacy of these interventions using experimental designs or intervention studies would provide helpful information for businesses looking to make the most of social media.
The study’s conclusion presents a paradigm-shifting narrative that questions conventional wisdom by demonstrating the beneficial relationships between social media use and workplace engagement in the specific context of Generation Z workers. The study illuminates a more complex and multidimensional relationship between social media use for non-work-related purposes and potential adverse effects, which defies widely held beliefs. The study’s primary objective was to fill a vacuum in the literature by analyzing the complex relationships between Generation Z’s social media involvement and work participation. The study took place in the context of rapidly developing communication technologies and the revolutionary impact of Generation Z on modern workspaces. The startling findings that social media use for purposes other than work positively correlated with workplace engagement among Generation Z employees served as the impetus for this investigation. The surprising results cast doubt on received wisdom and force a reassessment of the presumptive harm that social media causes to outcomes related to the workplace. The study’s positive correlations highlight the need to thoroughly comprehend the interactions between social media use and workplace engagement.
The importance of this work goes beyond a simple correlation analysis; it explores implications for theory, practice, and future research. Positive associations call for a break from popular narratives, reshaping the theoretical landscape and highlighting the complex and multidimensional nature of social media use among Generation Z. Organizations can practically apply these findings to obtain valuable insights. Gen Z employees’ engagement at work can be significantly increased by taking advantage of social media’s positive effects, both on and off the job. It is imperative for organizations seeking to cultivate a positive and stimulating work environment to acknowledge the significance of entertainment, peer dynamics, and the dynamic nature of online interactions.
Therefore, the study is significant because it adds to the current conversation about how technology, generational differences, and workplace dynamics interact. Future researchers should expand on this foundation by examining new trends and moderating factors and experimenting with interventions that maximize the use of social media for workplace engagement.
Abbas, M. (2017). The effect of organizational culture and leadership style towards employee engagement and their impact on employee loyalty. Asian Journal of Technology and Management Research (AJTMR) ISSN, 2249, 0892.
Adimora, D. E., Akaneme, I. N., & Aye, E. N. (2018). Peer pressure and home
Environment as predictors of disruptive and risky sexual behaviours of secondary school adolescents. African health sciences, 18(2), 218–226. https://doi.org/10.4314/ahs.v18i2.4
Adu-Oppong, A. A., & Agyin-Birikorang, E. (2014). Communication in the workplace: Guidelines for improving effectiveness. Global journal of commerce & management perspective, 3(5), 208-13.
Alagaraja, M., & Shuck, B. (2015). Exploring organizational alignment-employee engagement linkages and impact on individual performance: A conceptual model. Human Resource Development Review, 14(1), 17-37.
Albrecht, S. L., Bakker, A. B., Gruman, J. A., Macey, W. H., & Saks, A. M. (2015). Employee engagement, human resource management practices, and competitive advantage. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance.
Ali-Hassan, H., Nevo, D., & Wade, M. (2015). Linking dimensions of social media use to job performance: The role of social capital. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 24(2), 65-89.
Amah, O. E. (2018). Employee engagement in Nigeria: The role of leaders and boundary variables. S.A. Journal of Industrial Psychology, 44(1), 1-8.
Antony, M. R. (2018). Paradigm shift in employee engagement–A critical analysis on the drivers of employee engagement. International Journal of Information, Business, and Management, 10(2), 32-46.
Aronson, E., Timothy, D. W., & &Akert, R. M. (2010). Social Psychology. Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Ashforth, B. E., Schinoff, B. S., & Rogers, K. M. 2016. “I identify with her,” “I identify with
him”: Unpacking the dynamics of personal identification in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 41: 28–60.
Bakker, A. B., & Albrecht, S. (2018). Work engagement: current trends. Career Development International.
Bascha. (2011). Z: The open source generation. Opensource.com. Retrieved from
http://opensource.com/business/11/9/z-open-source-generation
BasuMallick, C. (2021). What Is Job Satisfaction? Definition, Factors, Importance, Statistics, and Examples. Toolbox. Retrieved from https://www.toolbox.com/hr/engagement-retention/articles/what-is-job-satisfaction/
Bharati, P., Zhang, W., & Chaudhury, A. (2015). Better knowledge of social media? Exploring the roles of social capital and organizational knowledge management. Journal of Knowledge Management.
Bhuwaneshwari, P., & Kumar, A. The study of the evolution of employee engagement constructs with changing generations. International Journal on Arts, Management and Humanities 6(2), 144-153, 14(1), 38-63.
Biswas, S., & Bhatnagar, J. (2013). Mediator analysis of employee engagement: Role of perceived organizational support, PO fit, organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Vikalpa, 38(1), 27–40.
Bock, G.-W., Zmud, R. W., Kim, Y.-G., & Lee, J.-N. (2005). Behavioral intention formation in
knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces, and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 87–111. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148669
Bradley University. (2020). THE SHINY NEW ADDICTION THAT GLOWS, BUZZES, AND FLASHES [Infographic]. Bradley.edu (https://onlinedegrees.bradley.edu/blog/the-shiny-new-addiction-that-glows-).
Brown, J. D. (2011). Questions and answers about language testing statistics: Likert items and scales of measurement? Retrieved from http://jalt.org/test/bro_34.htm
Buzzetto-Hollywood, N., & Alade, A. (2018). An examination of Gen Z learners attending a minority university. Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Skills and Lifelong Learning, 14, 41-54.
Carasco-Saul, M., Kim, W., & Kim, T. (2015). Leadership and employee engagement: Proposing research agendas through a review of literature. Human Resource Development Reviewisnt-a-what-but-a-who/$File/EY-what-if-the-next-big-disruptor-isn’t-a-what-but-a-who.pdf
Carlson, J. R., Zivnuska, S., Harris, R. B., Harris, K. J., & Carlson, D. S. (2016). Social media use in the workplace: A study of dual effects. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing (JOEUC), 28(1), 15-31.
Casciaro, T., Gino, F., & Kouchaki, M. 2014. The contaminating effects of building instrumental
ties: How networking can make us feel dirty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 59: 705–735Census.gov. (2018). QuickFacts SeaTac city, Washington. Retrieved from: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/seataccitywashington/PST045219
Chatzoglou, P., Chatzoudes, D., Ioakeimidou, D., & Tokoutsi, A. (2020). Generation Z: Factors affecting the use of Social Networking Sites (SNSs). In 2020 15th International Workshop on Semantic and Social Media Adaptation and Personalization (SMA pp. 1-6). IEEE.
Chen, W., Teo, M. H., & Nguyen, D. (2019). Singapore parents’ use of digital devices with
young children: Motivations and uses. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 28, 239–250. doi:10.1007/s40299-019-00432-w.
Cheung, C. M., Chiu, P. Y., & Lee, M. K. (2011). Online social networks: Why do students use
facebook? Computers in HumanBehavior, 27, 1337–1343. doi:10.1016/j.
chb.2010.07.028
Cheung, C. M., & Lee, M. K. (2009). Understanding the sustainability of a virtual community:
Model development and empirical test. Journal of Information Science, 35, 279–298.
Kane, G. C., Fichman, R. G., Gallaugher, J. & Glaser, J. (2009). Community Relations 2.0. Harv
Bus Rev. Nov;87(11):45-50, 132. PMID: 19891388. doi:10.1177/ 0165551508099088
Chicca, J., & Shellenbarger, T. (2018). Connecting with Generation Z: Approaches in nursing journal pre-proof19 education. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 13(3), 180-184.
Chiu, C. M., Cheng, H. L., Huang, H. Y., & Chen, C. F. (2013). Exploring individuals’
subjective well-being and loyalty towards social network sites from the perspective of network externalities: The Facebook case. International Journal of Information Management, 33, 539–552. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2013.01.007
Choi, B. Y., Min, J. Y., Ryoo, S. W., & Min, K. B. (2022). Use of work-related
communication technology outside regular working hours and work-family conflict (work interference with family and family interference with work): results from the 6th Korean working conditions survey. Annals of occupational and environmental medicine, 34, e44. https://doi-org.ezproxy2016.trident.edu/10.35371/aoem.2022.34.e44
Chun, S. A., Luna‐Reyes, L. F., Sandoval‐Almazán, R., Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2012). Promoting transparency and accountability through ICTs, social media, and collaborative e‐government. Transforming government: people, process, and policy.
Cilliers, E. J. (2017). The Challenge of teaching generation Z. International Journal of Social Sciences, 3(1), 188-198.
Clark, P., Crawford, T. N., Hulse, B., & Polivka, B. J. (2020). Resilience, Moral Distress, and Workplace Engagement in Emergency Department Nurses. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 019394592095697. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193945920956970
Clifton, J.. (Ed.). (2017). The State of the Global Workplace. Gallup Press.
Cooper-Thomas, H. D., Paterson, N. L., Stadler, M. J., & Saks, A. M. (2014). The relative importance of proactive behaviors and outcomes for predicting newcomer learning, well-being, and work engagement. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 84, 318–331. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2014.02.007
Crawford, A. M. (2008). Empowerment and organizational climate: An investigation of
mediating effects on the core -self evaluation, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment relationship (Order No. 3333120). Available from ProQuest One Academic. (304689501). https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/empowerment-organizational-climate-investigation/docview/304689501/se-2
Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: an interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874-900.
Curtis, E. A., Comiskey, C., & Dempsey, O. (2016). Importance and use of correlational research. Nurse Researcher, 23(6), 20–25. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.2016.e1382
Dagher, G. K., Chapa, O., & Junaid, N. (2015). The historical evolution of employee engagement and self-efficacy constructs. Journal of Management History,
Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 499–512
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2008). Self-Determination Theory: A Macrotheory of Human Motivation, Development, and Health. Canadian Psychology, 49(3), 182–185
DeVellis, R. F. (2016). Scale development: Theory and applications (Vol. 26): Sage publications.
Dholakia, U. M., Bagozzi, R. P., & Pearo, L. K. (2004). A social influence model of consumer
participation in network-and small-group-based virtual communities. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21, 241–263. doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2003.12.004.
Diaz, I., Chiaburu, D. S., Zimmerman, R. D., & Boswell, W. R. (2012). Communication technology: Pros and cons of constant connection to work. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(2), 500–508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2011.08.007
Dragana, O., Sikandar Ali, Q., Belem, B., Mir Muhammad, S., Vela Esthela, G., Ahmed
Muhammad, H., Feng, L. (2021). Effects of Social Media Use on Psychological Well-Being: A Mediated Model. Frontiers in Psychology. 12. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.678766
Duke, É., & Montag, C. (2017). Smartphone addiction and beyond: Initial insights on an emerging research topic and its relationship to internet addiction. In Internet Addiction (pp. 359-372). Springer international publishing.
Eldor, L., & Harpaz, I. (2015). A process model of employee engagement: The learning climate and its relationship with extra-role performance behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37, 213–235. doi: 10.1002/job.2037
Ernst & Young. (2015). What if the next big disruptor isn’t a what but a who? Ernst & Young LLP. Retrieved from https://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/EY-what-if-the-next-big-disruptor-Bradley University. (2021). The Shiny New Addition that Glows, Buzzes, and Flashes. {Infograhics}. Bradley.edu. Retrieved from: https://onlinedegrees.bradley.edu/blog/the-shiny-new-addiction-that-glows-buzzes-and-flashes
Facebook. (2013). Data use policy. Retrieved from https://www. facebook.com/about/privacy
Fiorenza, S., (2020). From boomers to Gen Z: How to engage a multigenerational workforce, Workforce.com. Retrieved from: https://www.workforce.com/news/from-boomers-to-gen-z-how-to-engage-a-multigenerational-workforce
Fish, A., & McKnight, J. C. (2014). Beyond surveillance fridges and socialized power drills: social media and the financialization of everyday life. Retrieved from http://culturedigitally.org/2014/04/ beyond-surveillance-fridges-and-socialized-power-drills
Folsom, J. (2020). How to Zoom like a boss during the coronavirus pandemic. NBC News. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/know-your-value/feature/how-zoom-boss-durin
Frese, M., & Zapf, D. (1988). Methodological issues in the study of work stress: Objective vs.
Subjective measurement of work stress and the question of longitudinal studies. In C. L. Cooper & R. Payne (Eds.), Causes, coping and consequences of stress at work (pp. 375–411). Chichester: Wiley
Gibson, J.W., Chen, W., Henry, E., Humphreys, J. and Lian, Y. (2013), Examining the work of Mary Parker Follett through the lens of critical biography. Journal of Management History, 19(4), 441-458.
Gillespie, T. (2014). Facebook’s algorithm—Why our assumptions are wrong, and our concerns are right. Retrieved from http:// culturedigitally.org/2014/07/facebooks-algorithm-why-ourassumptions-are-wrong-and-our-concerns-are-right7
Graf-Vlachy, L., Buhtz, K., & König, A. (2018). Social influence in technology adoption: Taking
stock and moving forward. Management Review Quarterly, 68, 37–76. doi:10.1007/s11301-017-0133-3
Greenwood, S., Perrin, A., & Duggan, M. (2016). Social media update 2016. Pew Research Center, 11(2), 1-18.
Gordhamer, S. (2009). 4 ways social media is changing business. Online: http://mashable.
com/2009/09/22/socialmedia-business [09 December 2011].
Guesalaga, R. (2016). The use of social media in sales: Individual and organizational antecedents, and the role of customer engagement in social media. Industrial Marketing Management, 54, 71-79.
Guo, R., Shen, Y. and Li, L. (2018), “Using social media to improve student-instructor communication in an online learning environment”, International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 33-43.
Hajli, N., & Lin, X. (2016). Exploring the Security of Information Sharing on Social Networking
Sites: The Role of Perceived Control of Information: JBE. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(1), 111-123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2346-x
Hassan, S., & Rohrbaugh, J. (2011). The role of psychological climate on public sector
employees’ organizational commitment: An empirical assessment for three occupational groups. International Public Management Journal, 14, 27-62.
Hilliard, R. (1958). Television and education. The Journal of Higher Education, 29, 431-470.
Retrieved from http://www. jstor.org/stable/1978698?seq=8#page_scan_tab_contents
Hsu, C. L., & Lu, H. P. (2007). Consumer behavior in online game communities: A motivational
factor perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1642–1659. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2005.09.001
Hsu, M. H., Tien, S. W., Lin, H. C., & Chang, C. M. (2015). Understanding the roles of cultural
differences and socio-economic status in social media continuance intention. Information Technology & People, 28, 224– 241. doi:10.1108/ITP-01-2014-0007
Ibongia, P.M. (2018). Social media use and millennial employee workplace engagement dynamics: a quantitative correlational study. (13805626) [Doctor dissertation, University of Phoenix]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses global.
Ilies, R., Aw, S. S. Y., & Pluut, H. (2015). Intraindividual models of employee well-being: What
Have we learned, and where do we go from here? European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24, 827–838.
Jenkins, R., (2021). Ryan Jenkins-The Next Generation. Retrieved from: https://blog.ryan-jenkins.com/how-generation-z-uses-technology-and-social-media
Kahn, W.A. (1990), Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. The Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692-724
Kaliannan, M., & Adjovu, S. N. (2015). Effective employee engagement and organizational success: a case study. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 172, 161-168.
Kane, G. C., Fichman, R. G., Gallaugher, J., Glaser, J. (2009). Community relations 2.0.
Harvard Bus Rev. Nov;87(11):45-50, 132. PMID: 19891388.
Kanuri, V. K., Chen, Y., & Sridhar, S. (2018). Scheduling content on social media: Theory, evidence, and application. Journal of Marketing, 82(6), 89-108.
Kaplan, A. M. (2012). If you love something, let it go mobile: Mobile marketing and mobile social media 4×4. Business Horizons, 55(2), 129-139.
Kardaras, N. (2016). Generation Z: Online and at risk? Scientific American. Retrieved from Generation Z: Online and at Risk? – Scientific American
Karikari, S., Osei-Frimpong, K. & Owusu-Frimpong, N., (2017). Evaluating individual level
antecedents and consequences of social media use in Ghana. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 123, (68-79). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.06.023.
(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162517308247)
Kelleher, B. (2011). Engaged employees high-performing organizations: Disengaged employees have been found to be I of the biggest threats 10 successful businesses, whereas engagement—Building a mutual commitment between employer and employee—Results in just the opposite. Financial Executive, 27(3), 51–54.
Kent, M. L., & Li, C. (2020). Toward a normative social media theory for public relations. Public Relations Review, 46(1), 101857.
Khamisa, N., Oldenburg, B., Peltzer, K., & Ilic, D. (2015). Work Related Stress, Burnout, Job Satisfaction and General Health of Nurses. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(1), 652–666. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph120100652
Kietzmann, J., Hermkens, K., McCarthy, I. & Silvestre, B. (2011). Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media. Business Horizons, 54(3),
241-251, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2011.01.005.
Kim, A. J., & Ko, E. (2012). Do social media marketing activities enhance customer equity? An empirical study of luxury fashion brand. Journal of Business Research, 65(10), 1480-1486.
Kim, H., Rhou, Y., Topcuoglu, E., & Kim, Y. G. (2020). Why hotel employees care about Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): Using need satisfaction theory. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 87, 102505.
Kim, S., & Leung, L. (2017). The effect of non-workplace social media use on workplace engagement: The role of entertainment value. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 28-37.
Korzynski, P. (2015). Online networking and employee engagement: What current
leaders do? Journal of Managerial Psychology, 30(5), 582–596. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-10-2013-0344
Kristof, A. L.: 1996, Person–Organization Fit: An Integrative Review of Its Conceptualizations,
Measurement, and Implications, Personnel Psychology 49(1), 1–49.
Król, K., & Zdonek, D. (2020). Social media use and its impact on intrinsic motivation in Generation Z: a case study from Poland. Global Knowledge, Memory, and Communication.
Ku, Y. C., Chen, R., & Zhang, H. (2013). Why do users continue using social networking sites?
An exploratory study of members in the United States and Taiwan. Information & Management, 50, .571–581. doi:10.1016/j.im.2013.07.01
Li, Y., Ye, F., & Sheu, C. (2014). Social capital, information sharing and
performance. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 34(11), 1440-1462. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-03-2013-0132
Liberman, B., Seidman, G., McKenna, K. & Buffardi, L. (2011). Employee job attitudes and
organizational characteristics as predictors of cyberloafing. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6). 2192-2199, doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.06.015.
Lin, K. Y., & Lu, H. P. (2011). Why people use social networking sites: An empirical study
integrating network externalities and motivation theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1152–1161. doi:10.1016/j. chb.2010.12.009
Luo, N., Guo, X., Lu, B., & Chen, G. (2018). Can non-work-related social media use benefit the company? A study on corporate blogging and affective organizational commitment. Computers in Human Behavior, 81, 84–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.12.004
Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Lyons, S., Urick, M., Kuron, L., & Schweitzer, L. (2015). Generational Differences in the Workplace: There Is Complexity Beyond the Stereotypes. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8(03), 346–356. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2015.48
Ma, S., Zhang, S., Li, G., & Wu, Y. (2019). Exploring information security education on social
media use: Perspective of uses and gratifications theory. [Exploring information security education] Aslib Journal of Information Management, 71(5), 618-636. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-09-2018-0213
Mariano, M. C. O., Maniego, J. C. M., Manila, H. L. M. D., Mapanoo, R. C. C., Maquiran, K. M. A., Macindo, J. R. B., … & Torres, G. C. S. (2018). Social media use profile, social skills, and nurse-patient interaction among registered nurses in tertiary hospitals: a structural equation model analysis. International journal of nursing studies, 80, 76-82.
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W.B. and Leiter, M.P. (2001), Job burnout, in Fiske, S.T., Schacter, D.L. and Zahn-Waxler, C. (Eds), Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397-422.
May, D. R., Gilson, R. L., & Harter, L. M. (2004), The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77(1), 11-37.
Mehrzi, N.A., & Singh, S. K., (2016), “Competing through employee engagement: a
proposed framework”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 65 Iss 6 pp. 831 – 843
Meola, A., (2022), Generation Z News: Latest characteristics, research, and facts. Inside
Men, L. R., O’Neil, J., & Ewing, M. (2020). Examining the effects of internal social media usage on employee engagement. Public Relations Review, 46(2), 101880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2020.101880
Milhem, M., Muda, H., & Ahmed, K. (2019). The Effect of Perceived Transformational Leadership Style on Employee Engagement: The Mediating Effect of Leader’s Emotional Intelligence. Foundations of Management, 11(1), 33-42.
Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing.
Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20–38.
Motowidlo, S.J. and Kell, H.J. (2013), “Job performance”, in Weiner, I.B. (Series Ed.) in
Schmitt, N.W. and Highhouse, S. (Vol. Eds), Handbook of Psychology, Vol. 12. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, pp. 82-103
Mount, M., & Martinez, M. G. (2014). Social media: A tool for open innovation. California Management Review, 56(4), 124-143.
Moustaka, & Constantinidis, T. C. (2010). Sources and effects of Work-related stress in nursing. Health Science Journal, 4(4), 210–.
Muhammad Hasnain Abbas Naqvi, Yushi Jiang, Miao Miao & Mishal Hasnain Naqvi | Yen- Chun Jim Wu (Reviewing editor) (2020) The effect of social influence, trust, and
entertainment value on social media use: Evidence from Pakistan, Cogent Business & Management, 7:1, DOI: 10.1080/23311975.2020.1723825
Nduhura, D., & Prieler, M. (2017). When I chat online, I feel relaxed and work better: Exploring the use of social media in the public sector work in Rwanda. Telecommunications Policy, 41(7-8), 708-716.
Ng, J. C. Y., Shao, I. Y. T., & Liu, Y. (2016). This is not what I wanted. Employee Relations, 38(4), 466–486. https://doi.org/10.1108/er-12-2015-0216
Nwabueze, Iyabode. (2013). Communication as Sociocultural Meaning Exchange: The Example
of Richard Wright’s Black Boy. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature. 2(173-177). 10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.2n.5p.173.
Orlikowski, W. J., & Baroudi, J. J. (1991). Studying Information Technology in Organizations:
Research Approaches and Assumptions. Information Systems Research, 1-28.
Osborne, S., & Hammoud, M. S. (2017). Effective employee engagement in the workplace. International Journal of Applied Management and Technology, 16(1), 4.
Özçakir, F., Fatih, M., & Özçakir, Ş. (2015). The Use of Social Media In Education: A Review Of Recent Research.
Pai, P., & Arnott, D. C. (2013). User adoption of social networking sites: Eliciting uses and
gratifications through a means–end approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1039–1053. doi:10.1016/j. chb.2012.06.025
Panahi, S., Watson, J., & Partridge, H. (2016). Social media and physicians: exploring the benefits and challenges. Health Informatics Journal, 22(2), 99-112.
Pekkala, K., Van Zoonen, W. (2022). Work-related social media use: The mediating role of social media communication self-efficacy. European Management Journal, 40(1), 67-76. doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2021.03.004.
Peng, X., Sheng, Y., & Huo, W. (2022). Work-related use of information and communication technologies and error admission: The roles of emotional exhaustion and person-organization fit. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 50(8), 1e+. https://link-gale-com.ezproxy2016.trident.edu/apps/doc/A714348799/OVIC?u
=los70631&sid=summon&xid=6d83f072
Pitafi, A. H., Khan, A. N., Khan, N. A., & Ren, M. (2020). Using enterprise social media to
investigate the effect of workplace conflict on employee creativity. Telematics and Informatics, 55, 101451.
Parry, E., & Solidoro, A. (2013). Social media as a mechanism for engagement? Social Media
in Human Resources Management 12, 121–141. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/S1877- 6361(2013)0000012010
Pitafi, A. H., Liu, H., & Cai, Z. (2018). Investigating the relationship between workplace conflict and employee agility: The role of enterprise social media. Telematics and Informatics, 35(8), 2157-2172.
Popli, S. & Rizvi I.A., (2016) Drivers of employee engagement, Global Business Review. Sage Publications, 17(4), 965-979. doi: 10.1177/09721509166445701
PrakashYadav, G., & Rai, J. (2017). The Generation Z and their social media usage: A review and a research outline. Global Journal of Enterprise Information System, 9(2), 110-116.
Quan-Haase, A., & Young, A. L. (2010). Uses and gratifications of social media: A comparison of Facebook and instant messaging. Bulletin of science, technology & society, 30(5), 350-361. DOI: 10.1177/0270467610380009
Rageh, I. A. (2017). The influence of perceived social media marketing activities on brand loyalty: The mediation effect of brand and value consciousness. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 29(1), 129-144. doi: doi:10.1108/APJML-10-2015-0154
Ragins, B. R., & Dutton, J. E. 2007. Positive relationships at work: An introduction and
invitation. In J. E. Dutton & B. R. Ragins (Eds.), Exploring positive relationships at work: Building a theoretical and research foundation: 3–25. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Rao, M. S. (2017). Innovative tools and techniques to ensure effective employee engagement. Industrial and Commercial Training, 49. 127-131. doi: 10.1108/ICT-06-2016-0037.
Reagan, R., (October 21, 2020). Everything You Need To Know About Generation Z In The Workplace in 2021. Top Tips. https://connecteam.com/generation-z-in-the-workplace/
Reio, T. G., & Sanders-Reio, J. (2011). Thinking About Workplace Engagement. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 13(4), 462–478. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422311430784
Ryan, T., Allen, K. A., Gray, D. L., & McInerney, D. M. (2017). How social are social media? A review of online social behavior and connectedness. Journal of Relationships Research, 8.
Salkind, N. (2007). Encyclopedia of Measurement and Statistics. Thousand Oaks: C.A. United States of America: Sage Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412952644
Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 21, 600-619.
Sayyed, B. J. W., & Gupta, R. (2020, June). Social Media Impact: Generation Z and Millenial on the Cathedra of Social Media. In 2020 8th International Conference on Reliability, Infocom Technologies and Optimization (Trends and Future Directions)(ICRITO) (pp. 595-600). IEEE.
Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The Measurement of Work Engagement with a Short Questionnaire: A Cross-National Study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 664(4), 701-716
Schaufeli, W. B., Martinez, I. M., Pinto, A. M., Salanova, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). Burnout and engagement in university students a cross-national study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(5), 464–481. doi: https://doi- org.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/10.1177/0022022102033005003
Schaufeli, W.B. and Bakker, A.B. (2004), Work engagement and the measurement of a concept. Gender in Organizations, 17( ), 89-112.
Schaufeli, W. B., Taris, T. W., & Bakker, A. B. (2008). It takes two to tango: Workaholism is working excessively and working compulsively. In R. J. Burke & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), The long work hours culture. Causes, consequences and choices (pp. 203–226). Bingley, UK: Emerald. doi: 10.1016/B978-1-038-4.00009-9
Scheepers, H., Scheepers, R., Stockdale, R., & Nurdin, N. (2014). The Dependent Variable in Social Media Use, Journal of Computer Information Systems, 54:2, 25-34, doi: 10.1080/08874417.2014.11645683
Schullery, N. M. (2013). Workplace Engagement and Generational Differences in Values. Business Communication Quarterly, 76(2), 252–265. https://doi.org/10.1177/1080569913476543
Seymour, E., (2019, August 25). Gen Z: Born to be Digital. US News. Retrieved from: https://www.voanews.com/student-union/gen-z-born-be-digital
Sharma, N., & Garg, P. (2017). Psychological contract and psychological empowerment as employee engagement drivers in Indian I.T. sector. International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research, 15(1),.
Shrotryia, V. K., & Dhanda, U. (2020). Development of employee engagement measure: experiences from best companies to work for in India. Measuring Business Excellence.
Siegrist, J. (2016). Effort-Reward Imbalance Model. Stress: Concepts, Cognition, Emotion, and Behavior, 1, 81–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-800951-2.00009-1
Singh, A.P., & Dangmel, J. (2016). Understanding the Generation Z: The
Future Workforce. –Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies. 3(3). 1-5 Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305280948
Singh, S. K., Burgess, T. F., Heap, J., & Al Mehrzi, N. (2016). Competing through employee engagement: a proposed framework. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management.
Smith, B. G., & Gallicano, T. D. (2015). Terms of engagement: Analyzing public engagement with organizations through social media. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 82-90.
Smith, T., (2020). Employee Engagement, Investopedia. Retrieved from Employee Engagement Definition and Example (investopedia.com)
Social Media Outlook for 2018. (2018). eMarketer Webinar. Retrieved from www.emarketer.com
Spitzberg, B.H. (2006). Preliminary Development of a Model and Measure of Computer-
Mediated Communication (Cmc) Competence, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 629–666, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00030.x.
Stahl, A., (2019). How to Manage Generation-Z Employees, Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleystahl/2019/09/26/how-to-manage-generation-z-employees/?sh=217d0384681e
Stephens, J. P., Heaphy, E. D., Carmeli, A., Spreitzer, G. M., & Dutton, J. E. 2013. Relationship
quality and virtuousness: Emotional carrying capacity as a source of individual and team resilience. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 49: 13–41.
Syrek, C. J., Kühnel, J., Vahle-Hinz, T., & De Bloom, J. (2017). Share, like, twitter, and connect: Ecological momentary assessment to examine the relationship between non-work social media use at work and work engagement. Work & Stress, 32(3), 209–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2017.1367736
Swar, B., and Hameed, T. (2017). “Fear of missing out, social media engagement smartphone addiction and distraction: moderating role of self-help mobile apps-based interventions in the youth,” Paper presented at the 10th International Conference on Health Informatics (Porto).
Tankovska, H. (2021 January 28). Number of Social Media Users worldwide from 2017-2025 (in billions). Retrieved from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/278414/numbeof-worldwide-social-network-users/
Thomas, K. W., & Tymon, W. G., Jr. 1994. Does empowerment always work
Understanding the role of intrinsic motivation and personal interpretation. Journal of Management Systems, 6: 39-54.
Tumblr. (2014). Terms of service. Retrieved from https://www. tumblr.com/policy/en/terms-of-service
Tushman, M. L. (1979). Impacts of Perceived Environmental Variability on Patterns of Work Related Communication. Academy of Management Journal, 22(3), 482–500. https://doi.org/10.5465/255739
Twitter. (2014). Terms of service. Retrieved from https://twitter. com/tos/
Twenge, J. M. (2017). IGen: Why today’s super-connected kids are growing up less rebellious, more tolerant, less happy—and completely unprepared for adulthood (and what this means for the rest of us). New York: Atria Books.
Van Deursen, A. Verlage, C., & Van Laar, E. (2019). Social networks ite skills for communication professionals: Conceptualization, operationalization, and an empirical investigation. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communications,62(1), 43e54.
Van Zoonen, W., van der Meer, T. G. L. A., & Verhoeven, J. W. M. (2014). Employees work-related social-media use: His master’s voice. Public Relations Review, 40(5), 850–852. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.07.001
Van Zoonen & Treem. (2019). The role of organizational identification and the desire to succeed in employees’ use of personal Twitter accounts for work, Computers in Human Behavior, (100)26-34. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563219302262
Vitelar, A., (2019). Like Me: Generation Z and the Use of Social Media for Personal Branding. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, Vol. 7 No. 2, 257-268, ISSN 2329-8042
Wang, Y., & Hu, J. (2016). The relationship between non-workplace social media use and
workplace engagement: The mediating role of psychological detachment. *International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction*, *32*(2), 75-84.
Whiting, A., & Williams, D. (2013). Why people use social media: a uses and gratifications approach. Qualitative Market Research, 16(4), 362-369. https://doi.org/10.1108/QMR-06-2013-0041
Wright, K. B., Abendschein, B., Wombacher, K., O’Connor, M., Hoffman, M., Dempsey, M., Krull, C., Dewes, A., & Shelton, A. (2014). Work-Related Communication Technology Use Outside of Regular Work Hours and Work Life Conflict. Management Communication Quarterly, 28(4), 507–530. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318914533332
Yazdanparast, A., Joseph, M. and Muniz, F. (2016), “Consumer based brand equity in the 21st century: an examination of the role of social media marketing”, Young Consumers, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 243-255. doi:10.1108/YC-03-2016-00590
Yeshambel, T., Belete, M., & Mulualem, Y. (2016). Impact of online social networking on employee’s productivity at workplace in university of Gondar-A case study. International Journal of Computer Applications, 135(3), 18-24.
YouTube. (2010). Terms of service. Retrieved from https://www. youtube.com/static? gl=US & template=terms
Hospitality Technology Healthcare Other
0-1 Year 1-3 Years 3-5 Years 5-10 Years More than 10 years
1 2 3 4 More than 4 Networks
| Item No.
|
Item |
Never |
Almost Never |
Rarely |
Sometimes |
Often |
Very Often |
Always |
| 1. | At my work, I feel bursting with energy | | | | | | | |
| 2. | I feel strong and vigorous when at work | | | | | | | |
| 3. | When I get up in the morning, I feel like going to work | | | | | | | |
| Item No.
|
Item | Never | Almost Never | Rarely | Sometimes | Often | Very Often | Always |
| Item No.
|
Item | Never | Almost Never | Rarely | Sometimes | Often | Very Often | Always |
| 4. | I can continue working for very long periods of time. | | | | | | | |
| 5. | At my job, I am very resilient mentally. | | | | | | | |
| 6. | At my work, I always persevere, even when things do not go well. | | | | | | | |
| 7. | I find the work that I do full of meaning and purpose. | | | | | | | |
| 8. | I am enthusiastic about my job. | | | | | | | |
| 9. | My job inspires me | | | | | | | |
| 10. | I am proud of the work that I do. | | | | | | | |
| 11. | To me, my job is challenging. | | | | | | | |
| 12. | Time flies when I’m working. | | | | | | | |
| Item No. | Item | Never | Almost Never | Rarely | Sometimes | Often | Very Often | Always |
| Item No. | Item | Never | Almost Never | Rarely | Sometimes | Often | Very Often | Always |
| 13. | When I am working, I forget everything else around me. | | | | | | | |
| 14. | I feel happy when I am working intensely. | | | | | | | |
| 15. | I am immersed in my work. | | | | | | | |
| 16. | I get carried away when I’m working. | | | | | | | |
| 17. | It is difficult to detach myself from my job. | | | | | | | |
| Item No. | Item | Never | Almost Never | Rarely | Sometimes | Often | Very Often | Always |
| Item No. | Item | Never | Almost Never | Rarely | Sometimes | Often | Very Often | Always |
| 18. | I use these sites to see what information/ links/ thoughts other people share. | | | | | | | |
| 19. | I use social media to be kept informed of what is happening at conferences/ events I am attending. | | | | | | | |
| 20. | I use these sites to find out about celebrities I like | | | | | | | |
| 21. | I use social media to be kept informed of people/ websites who can provide me with useful information/ links. | | | | | | | |
| 22. | I use these sites to find out about TV shows and films I like | | | | | | | |
| 23. | I use these sites to find out about products I like | | | | | | | |
| 24. | I use these sites to share my opinions with my friends. | | | | | | | |
| 25. | I use these sites to communicate with my friends. | | | | | | | |
| 26. | I use these sites to share information with my friends. | | | | | | | |
| 27. | I use these sites to share my opinions and ideals with like-minded people. | | | | | | | |
| 28. | I use these sites to find people with the same opinions and ideas. | | | | | | | |
| 29. | I use social media to tell people what I am doing. | | | | | | | |
| 30. | I use social media to find like-minded people to socialize with | | | | | | | |
| 31. | I joined social media because it is the best place to find out information about people, events, and things I am interested in | | | | | | | |
| 32. | I joined social media to find others who share my views and opinions.
|
| | | | | | |
| 33. | I joined social media because my friends have joined. | | | | | | | |
| 34. | I joined social media because it is the place where many events and things I am interested in are organized. | | | | | | | |
| 35. | I joined social media to establish my online identity. | | | | | | | |
| Item No. | Item | Never | Almost
Never |
Rarely | Sometimes | Often | Very Often | Always |
Appendix B: G*Power Analysis
Appendix C: Letter of Informed Consent
TITLE OF STUDY
Impact of Social Media Use on Workplace Engagement
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Juan Tate
2200 East Germann Road, Suite 150
Chandler, AZ 85286
PURPOSE OF STUDY
You are being asked to take part in a research study. Before you decide to participate in this study, it is important that you understand why the research is being done and what it will involve. Please read the following information carefully. Please ask the researcher if there is anything that is not clear or if you need more information.
The purpose of this study will enable an employer to determine if social media usage benefits the organization or lower its productivity. It will also allow them to know how Gen Z employees use social media and if it can affect their organizational behavior and performance.
STUDY PROCEDURES
I employ Prolific to collect the collect the data. To distribute the instrument through their circuit. In result, I will use statistical analyses of their responses to examine their relationship between the two variables.
Time consumption for the participants will be about 5-10 minutes.
RISKS
No risk to participants
You may decline to answer any or all questions and you may terminate your involvement at any time if you choose.
BENEFITS
This study contributes to this line of research by including knowledge seeking and sharing as an antecedent of employee engagement. It will study establishes a causal relationship between knowledge seeking and sharing and employee engagement. The basis of which is that if leaders in organizations promote open communication, if they promote the use of social media for purposes of knowledge seeking and sharing, then higher levels of engagement will be achieved.
CONFIDENTIALITY
Your responses to this [survey] will be anonymous. Please do not write any identifying information on your [survey]
Participant data will be kept confidential except in cases where the researcher is legally obligated to report specific incidents. These incidents include, but may not be limited to, incidents of abuse and suicide risk.
CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions at any time about this study, or you experience adverse effects as the result of participating in this study, you may contact the researcher whose contact information is provided on the first page. If you have questions regarding your rights as a research participant, or if problems arise which you do not feel you can discuss with the Primary Investigator, please contact the Institutional Review Board at (adam.fullerton@trident.edu)
VOLUNTARY PARTICIPATION
Your participation in this study is voluntary. It is up to you to decide whether or not to take part in this study. If you decide to take part in this study, you will be asked to sign a consent form. After you sign the consent form, you are still free to withdraw at any time and without giving a reason. Withdrawing from this study will not affect the relationship you have, if any, with the researcher. If you withdraw from the study before data collection is completed, your data will be returned to you or destroyed.
CONSENT
I have read and I understand the provided information and have had the opportunity to ask questions. I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time, without giving a reason and without cost. I understand that I will be given a copy of this consent form. I voluntarily agree to take part in this study.
I agree to participate in this research study.
I decline to participate in this research study.
Appendix D: IRB Approval
DATE: October 3, 2023
TO: Juan Tate, MBA,
FROM: American InterContinental University System Institutional Review Board (IRB)
PROJECT TITLE: [2104787-1] Impact of Social Media Use on Workplace Engagement REFERENCE #:
SUBMISSION TYPE: New Project
ACTION: APPROVED APPROVAL DATE: September 21, 2023 EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW TYPE: Expedited Review
REVIEW CATEGORY: Expedited review category # [enter category, or delete line]
Thank you for your submission of New Project materials for this project. The American InterContinental University System Institutional Review Board (IRB) has APPROVED your submission. This approval is based on an appropriate risk/benefit ratio and a project design wherein the risks have been minimized. All research must be conducted in accordance with this approved submission.
This submission has received Expedited Review based on the applicable federal regulation.
Please remember that informed consent is a process beginning with a description of the project and insurance of participant understanding followed by a signed consent form. Informed consent must continue throughout the project via a dialogue between the researcher and research participant. Federal regulations require that each participant receives a copy of the consent document.
Please note that any revision to previously approved materials must be approved by this committee prior to initiation. Please use the appropriate revision forms for this procedure.
All UNANTICIPATED PROBLEMS involving risks to subjects or others (UPIRSOs) and SERIOUS and UNEXPECTED adverse events must be reported promptly to this office. Please use the appropriate reporting forms for this procedure. All FDA and sponsor reporting requirements should also be followed.
All NON-COMPLIANCE issues or COMPLAINTS regarding this project must be reported promptly to this office.
This project has been determined to be a MINIMAL RISK project. Based on the risks, this project requires continuing review by this committee on an annual basis. Please use the appropriate forms for this procedure. Your documentation for continuing review must be received with sufficient time for review and continued approval before the expiration date of.
Please note that all research records must be retained for a minimum of three years after the completion of the project.
If you have any questions, please contact Adam Fullerton at or adam.fullerton@trident.edu. Please include your project title and reference number in all correspondence with this committee.
This letter has been issued in accordance with all applicable regulations, and a copy is retained within American InterContinental University System Institutional Review Board (IRB)’s records.
Evan John