Employee Engagement Under Pressure: The Conditional Effects of Job Resources and Target Pressure on Employee Performance in the Banking Sector

Sintia Ulandari; Suhardi Suhardi; Afrizal Afrizal

doi:10.55681/economina.v5i7.3348

Authors

Sintia Ulandari Program Magister Manajemen, Universitas Pertiba, Indonesia
Suhardi Program Magister Manajemen, Universitas Pertiba, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3552-7043
Afrizal Program Magister Manajemen, Universitas Pertiba, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55681/economina.v5i7.3348

Keywords:

Employee Engagement, Job Resources, Work Motivation, Target Pressure, Employee Performance, JD-R Theory, Psychological Resource Depletion

Abstract

The intensification of performance pressure in modern banking raises concerns about the sustainability of employee engagement under target-driven systems. Although employee engagement is traditionally viewed as a positive psychological mechanism enhancing performance, aggressive key performance indicators, digital monitoring, and continuous target evaluation may constrain its beneficial effects. This study examines employee engagement as a psychological mechanism linking job resources and work motivation to employee performance and investigates the moderating role of target pressure in the banking sector. Grounded in Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) Theory and Conservation of Resources (COR) Theory, the study conceptualizes engagement as a conditional mechanism whose effectiveness may diminish under excessive performance demands. A quantitative explanatory design was employed using survey data from 200 banking employees working within target-based performance systems in Indonesia. Generalized Structured Component Analysis (GSCA) was used to test direct, mediating, and moderating relationships. The findings show that job resources and work motivation positively influence employee engagement, which significantly improves employee performance. Employee engagement also mediates the effects of job resources and work motivation on performance. However, target pressure significantly weakens the positive engagement–performance relationship, indicating that engagement is context-dependent and potentially unsustainable in high-pressure environments. The study extends JD-R Theory by integrating resource depletion and strain pathway perspectives and advances an engagement-under-pressure perspective. Practically, organizations should balance performance demands with employees’ psychological resource sustainability through adaptive target management and sustainable human resource practices.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Albrecht, S. L., Breidahl, E., & Marty, A. (2018). Organizational resources, organizational engagement climate, and employee engagement. Career Development International, 23(1), 67–85. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-04-2017-0064

Bakker, A. B., & Albrecht, S. (2018). Work engagement: Current trends. Career Development International, 23(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-11-2017-0207

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands–Resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2017). Job Demands–Resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(3), 273–285. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000056

Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Sanz-Vergel, A. I. (2014). Burnout and work engagement: The JD–R approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 389–411. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091235

Bakker, A. B., Hetland, J., Olsen, O. K., & Espevik, R. (2023). Daily strengths use and employee well-being: The moderating role of workload and performance pressure. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 32(2), 211–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2022.2151234

Bulińska-Stangrecka, H., & Bagieńska, A. (2021). The role of employee relations in shaping job satisfaction as an element promoting positive mental health at work in the era of COVID-19. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(4), 1903. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041903

Cavanaugh, M. A., Boswell, W. R., Roehling, M. V., & Boudreau, J. W. (2000). An empirical examination of self-reported work stress among U.S. managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1), 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.1.65

Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology, 64(1), 89–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01203.x

Cooke, F. L., Cooper, B., Bartram, T., Wang, J., & Mei, H. (2020). Mapping the relationships between high-performance work systems, employee resilience and engagement: A study of the banking industry in China. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(8), 1239–1260. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1137618

Crawford, E. R., LePine, J. A., & Rich, B. L. (2010). Linking job demands and resources to employee engagement and burnout: A theoretical extension and meta-analytic test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(5), 834–848. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019364

Deci, E. L., Olafsen, A. H., & Ryan, R. M. (2017). Self-determination theory in work organizations: The state of a science. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4, 19–43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113108

Demerouti, E., & Bakker, A. B. (2011). The Job Demands–Resources model: Challenges for future research. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 37(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v37i2.974

Halbesleben, J. R. B. (2010). A meta-analysis of work engagement: Relationships with burnout, demands, resources, and consequences. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 102–117). Psychology Press.

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.

Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513–524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.3.513

Hobfoll, S. E., Halbesleben, J., Neveu, J.-P., & Westman, M. (2018). Conservation of resources in the organizational context: The reality of resources and their consequences. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5, 103–128. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104640

Hwang, H., Malhotra, N. K., Kim, Y., Tomiuk, M. A., & Hong, S. (2010). A comparative study on parameter recovery of three approaches to structural equation modeling. Journal of Marketing Research, 47(4), 699–712. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.47.4.699

Karatepe, O. M., Rezapouraghdam, H., & Hassannia, R. (2021). Job insecurity, work engagement and their effects on hotel employees’ non-green and nonattendance behaviors. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 87, 102472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102472

Knight, C., Patterson, M., & Dawson, J. (2021). Building work engagement: A systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the effectiveness of work engagement interventions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(4), 393–411. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2167

Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 11(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.2015100101

Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C. M., Hildebrandt, V. H., Van Buuren, S., Van der Beek, A. J., & De Vet, H. C. W. (2014). Improving the individual work performance questionnaire using Rasch analysis. Journal of Applied Measurement, 15(2), 160–175.

LePine, J. A., Podsakoff, N. P., & LePine, M. A. (2005). A meta-analytic test of the challenge stressor–hindrance stressor framework. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 764–775. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2005.18803921

Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1(1), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2007.0002.x

Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2016). Understanding the burnout experience: Recent research and its implications for psychiatry. World Psychiatry, 15(2), 103–111. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20311

Molino, M., Ingusci, E., Signore, F., Manuti, A., Giancaspro, M. L., Russo, V., Zito, M., & Cortese, C. G. (2020). Wellbeing costs of technology use during COVID-19 remote working: An investigation using the Italian translation of the technostress creators scale. Sustainability, 12(15), 5911. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12155911

Pattnaik, S. C., & Panda, N. (2020). Supervisor support, work engagement and turnover intentions: Evidence from Indian call centers. Journal of Asia Business Studies, 14(5), 621–635. https://doi.org/10.1108/JABS-08-2019-0261

Podsakoff, N. P., LePine, J. A., & LePine, M. A. (2007). Differential challenge stressor–hindrance stressor relationships with job attitudes, turnover intentions, turnover, and withdrawal behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 438–454. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.438

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879

Rich, B. L., LePine, J. A., & Crawford, E. R. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 617–635. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.51468988

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860

Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(7), 600–619. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940610690169

Saks, A. M. (2022). Caring human resources management and employee engagement. Human Resource Management Review, 32(3), 100835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2021.100835

Salanova, M., Llorens, S., & Martínez, I. M. (2021). Contributions from positive organizational psychology to develop healthy and resilient organizations. Papeles del Psicólogo, 42(3), 177–184.

Schaufeli, W. B. (2021). Engaging leadership: How to promote work engagement? Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 754556. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.754556

Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 71–92. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015630930326

Sonnentag, S. (2018). The recovery paradox: Portraying the complex interplay between job stressors, lack of recovery, and poor well-being. Research in Organizational Behavior, 38, 169–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2018.11.002

Tarafdar, M., Cooper, C. L., & Stich, J.-F. (2020). The technostress trifecta: Techno eustress, techno distress and design. Information Systems Journal, 29(1), 6–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12169

Van den Broeck, A., Ferris, D. L., Chang, C.-H., & Rosen, C. C. (2021). A review of self-determination theory’s basic psychological needs at work. Journal of Management, 42(5), 1195–1229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316632058

Wright, T. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Emotional exhaustion as a predictor of job performance and voluntary turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(3), 486–493. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.3.486

Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2009). Work engagement and financial returns: A diary study on the role of job and personal resources. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82(1), 183–200. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317908X285633