Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership

& Governance

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wasw21

Work Engagement and Its Relationship with

Personal Well-Being: A Cross-Sectional Exploratory
Study of Human Service Workers

Erica Leeanne Lizano

To cite this article: Erica Leeanne Lizano (2021): Work Engagement and Its Relationship
with Personal Well-Being: A Cross-Sectional Exploratory Study of Human Service
Workers, Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, DOI:
10.1080/23303131.2021.1898071

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/23303131.2021.1898071

Published online: 15 Mar 2021.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 43

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wasw21
HUMAN SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS: MANAGEMENT, LEADERSHIP & GOVERNANCE
https://doi.org/10.1080/23303131.2021.1898071

Work Engagement and Its Relationship with Personal Well-Being: A

Cross-Sectional Exploratory Study of Human Service Workers
Erica Leeanne Lizano
Social Work Department, California State University, Fullerton, California, USA

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
Studies on worker well-being within the human services sector have largely Work engagement; life
looked at factors that put the well-being of workers at risk but few studies satisfaction; health
have focused on workplace experiences that promote worker well-being.
This study examines the relationship between work engagement and life
satisfaction, and overall health among social workers and human service
workers. Data for this study were drawn from a convenience sample of 133
social workers and human service workers using a self-administered work­
place survey. Two hierarchical linear multiple regression models were con­
ducted to assess the relationship between work engagement and affective (i.
e., life satisfaction) and physical well-being (i.e., health). Findings suggest that
being engaged with work is associated with greater levels of life satisfaction
and health. A discussion on the impact of study findings on practice and
future research is presented.

Introduction
Workers continue to be the most valuable asset in any human service organization. As such, the well-being
of workers should be of paramount importance to any manager, administrator, or organizational leader.
Studies on worker well-being within the human services sector have largely looked at factors that put the
well-being of workers at risk, such as job stress (Lloyd, King, & Chenoweth, 2002), job burnout (Lizano,
2015), and secondary trauma (Bride, 2007), but few studies have focused on workplace experiences that
promote worker well-being. One such understudied area of research includes work engagement within the
human service sector. Work engagement, considered by some as the “antipode” of job burnout (Bakker,
Schaufeli, Leiter, & Taris, 2008), refers to the relationship that a worker has to his/her/their work.
Engagement in the workplace consists of vigor, dedication, and absorption as they relate to one’s work
and is a positive affective state (Bakker & Leiter, 2010). Findings from empirical studies in the general
workforce literature suggest that there are positive effects to work engagement including employee well-
being, such as reduced depression and greater life satisfaction (Hakanen & Schaufeli, 2012) and positive
organizational outcomes such as greater organizational commitment (Hakanen, Bakker, & Schaufeli, 2006)
and employee performance (Salanova, Agut, & Peiró, 2005).
Work engagement research developed in response to job burnout. Whereas the burned-out worker
is described as exhausted and disconnected, the engaged worker has high levels of energy and
identification with his/her work (Bakker, Demerouti, & Sanz-Vergel, 2014).
Despite the growth in research on work engagement in the field of occupational psychology, limited
research has been carried out in human service-specific samples. As the human services sector
continues to prioritize the well-being of its workers, it will become increasingly important to under­
stand the relationship between work engagement and worker well-being. This study examines the

CONTACT Erica Leeanne Lizano [email protected] Social Work Department, California State University, 800 N State
College Blvd, Fullerton, CA 92831
© 2021 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 E. L. LIZANO

relationship between work engagement and life satisfaction, and overall health among social workers
and human service workers.

Literature review
Job burnout has been a primary focus of workforce well-being research within the human service
workforce literature. Much of the job burnout research within the human service field has focused on
the negative impact of job burnout on organizational outcomes including intention to leave (Boyas,
Wind, & Ruiz, 2013; Kim & Stoner, 2008) or worker well-being outcomes such as poor health
outcomes (Kim, Ji, & Kao, 2011), and affective well-being (e.g. job satisfaction; Lizano, 2015). An
emerging and related vein of workforce well-being research has developed around the concept of work
engagement. Work engagement research grew out of a response to job burnout research and
conversely focuses on the positive aspects of work and its benefits to the well-being of employees.
Influenced by positive psychology, work engagement scholars have shed light on the various positive
results that are experienced by individuals who are engaged with their work. Rather than taking
a deficit-based approach to worker well-being research where the focus might be on reducing burnout,
studies on worker engagement have the potential to give organizational leaders and managers tools to
increase or promote work engagement and subsequently worker well-being.
Work engagement scholars have drawn important distinctions between work engagement and
other related concepts such as organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Whereas work
commitment can be thought of as attachment and identification with the organization, work engage­
ment refers to dedication, vigor, and absorption with one’s work (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2010). Similarly,
conceptual differences have been drawn between work engagement and job satisfaction. Job satisfac­
tion is concerned with affect about work and connotes satiation (i.e. contentment) as compared to
engagement which refers to mood at work with a connotation of activation (i.e. excitement).
Work engagement research has grown in popularity in the last two decades and the growth of
studies around this topic has generated controversy among workforce scholars. The crux of the
disagreement lies around the definition of work engagement and its relationship to job burnout.
There are two predominating viewpoints on work engagement. The first views work engagement as
existing on opposite poles of the same spectrum as job burnout (Leiter & Maslach, 2017). From this
perspective, an employee exhibiting lower levels of job burnout would subsequently exhibit higher
levels of work engagement (Leiter & Maslach, 2017). Alternatively, there are scholars who view work
engagement as an independent and distinct concept that is negatively related to job burnout
(González-Romá, Schaufeli, Bakker, & Lloret, 2006). These different perspectives on the relationship
between job burnout and work engagement have led to divergent approaches to the measure of work
engagement. Those who view work engagement as the antithesis to job burnout measure work
engagement using the opposite pattern of scores on the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI; Maslach,
Jackson, Leiter, Schaufeli, & Schwab, 1986), the most widely used job burnout measure developed by
Maslach and colleagues. From this perspective, an engaged employee would score low on emotional
exhaustion and depersonalization, and high in personal accomplishment. In contrast, those who
perceive work engagement as an independent construct that is negatively related to job burnout,
tend to measure work engagement using the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES; Schaufeli,
Salanova, Gonza´lez-roma´, & Bakker, 2002). Based on empirical findings that support the concep­
tualization of burnout and work engagement as independent and distinct constructs that are nega­
tively related (Goering, Shimazu, Zhou, Wada, & Sakai, 2017; González-Romá et al., 2006), work
engagement is conceptually defined in this study as consisting of vigor, dedication, and absorption
rather than the opposite of burnout.
 HUMAN SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS: MANAGEMENT, LEADERSHIP & GOVERNANCE 3

Theory
The literature on worker well-being suggests that workplace experiences, such as job burnout or work
engagement, have consequences that can affect the physical and psychological well-being of workers
and their behaviors. In their widely cited review of literature and synthesis, Danna and Griffin (1999)
present a framework and empirical evidence for the influence of workplace experiences on individuals
including physical, psychological, and behavioral consequences. Well-being in the workplace is at the
center of the framework with antecedents to well-being including the work setting (hazards in the
workplace), personality traits, and occupational stressors. Danna and Griffin conceptually define well-
being in the workplace as a broad construct that encompasses nonwork satisfactions (e.g. life
satisfaction, satisfaction with family life), work-/job-related satisfactions (e.g. job satisfaction, pay
satisfaction), and mental/psychological and physical health (affect, general health anxiety) of a worker.
The authors posit that well-being in the workplace has individual and organizational consequences. At
an individual level, workers can experience physical, psychological, and behavioral consequences. At
the organizational level, well-being in the workplace can impact things such as productivity and
absenteeism.

Job demands-resources theory (JD-R)

JD-R theory provides an explanation for the mechanism that underlies the relationship between work
engagement and worker well-being. JD-R theory assumes that all jobs have demands and resources.
Job demands refer to any aspects of the job that require physical or psychological effort while resources
include any physical, psychological or social aspect of the job that facilitates doing the work, achieving
work goals, or results in personal growth and development (Bakker & Demerouti, 2017). A second key
postulate of JD-R theory is that job demands and resources trigger two underlying psychological
processes which include health impairment and motivation, respectively. The health impairment
process is thought to lead to job burnout while the motivational process leads to work engagement
(Bakker & Demerouti, 2017).
Some of the theoretical explanations for the relationship between engagement and well-being
suggest that it is possible that engaged workers are more likely to dedicate time to leisure activities
or relaxation (Bakker et al., 2014). Fredrickson’s (1998) broaden-and-build theory of positive emo­
tions has also been used to explain the positive impact of work engagement on worker well-being
(Salanova, Schaufeli, Xanthopou- Lou, & Bakker, 2010). Fredrickson (2001) assumes that positive
emotions, such as joy and pride, or in the case of work engagement, vigor, dedication, and absorption,
can broaden an individual’s momentary thought-action repertoire and build long-lasting physical and
intellectual resources. It is further assumed that there can be an accumulation of personal resources
due to the building and broadening that results from experiencing positive emotions which can
subsequently lead to improvements in the health and well-being of an individual. Furthermore, the
present study is informed by the spillover process, which occurs when experiences in the work domain
impact the personal life domains of individuals (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000). Based on the assump­
tions of spillover theory, experiences in the workplace can impact the personal well-being of a worker.
Though the focus of this study is on the consequences of work engagement on worker well-being, it
is important to note some of antecedents to work engagement. The antecedents to work engagement
can be grouped into two categories, contextual/situational and individual. Some of the contextual/
situational factors that have been found to lead to work engagement include job resources such as
social support from peers and supervisors, coaching, and job control (Bakker et al., 2014). Individual
factors linked to work engagement include individual characteristics such as self-efficacy, optimism,
and proactive personalities (Bakker et al., 2014; Young, Glerum, Wang, & Joseph, 2018).
4 E. L. LIZANO

Empirical studies
The human service sector has unique characteristics distinguishing it from other industries. A primary
feature of human service work is the emphasis on helping others when they are in need or in crisis.
Hasenfeld (1983, p. 1) defines the purpose of human service organizations as having to, “protect,
maintain, or enhance the personal well-being of people by defining, shaping or altering their personal
attributes.” Human service workers are also required to use the self as vehicles for change and as such,
they make great emotional investments when serving clients (Hasenfeld, 2010) these emotional
investments can lead to emotional exhaustion and cynicism (Maslach, 2003). As previously men­
tioned, job burnout research in the human service sector has been prevalent. The human service sector
has been identified as a challenging field of work due to the often cited high caseloads/workload
(Arrington, 2008; Ballenger-Browning et al., 2011), risk of violence when working with clients (Shin,
2011; Smith, Colletta, & Bender, 2017) and low compensation when compared to other professions
(Arrington, 2008; GAO, 2003).
Despite the challenges, the human service sector attracts workers because of a passion or calling to
serve others. The level of work engagement among human service workers when compared to other
professions is mixed. In their study examining the psychometric properties of the Utrecht Work
Engagement Scale (UWES), Schaufeli, Bakker, and Salanova (2006) compared work engagement
across occupations and found some of the lower levels of mean engagement scores among social
workers and counselors. However, in their meta-analytic study of work engagement across 30
European countries, Hakanen, Ropponen, Schaufeli, and De Witte (2018) found some of the highest
levels of work engagement among those in the health and social work sectors.
To the author’s knowledge, limited empirical research has been conducted on work engagement
specifically focused on social workers or human service workers. Human service workers have been
included in work engagement studies but typically are part of professionally mixed study samples
(Bakker, Westman, Van Emmerik, & Demerouti, 2009; Schaufeli et al., 2006). Two studies were
identified during a review of literature specifically focused on work engagement among human service
workers only. Work engagement was studied as an outcome variable in both of the identified studies
but did not link work engagement to any worker well-being outcomes. In their study of 831 social
workers, Geisler, Berthelsen, and Muhonen (2019) set out to examine whether organizational ante­
cedents to work engagement are related to any worker well-being outcomes. Similarly, in their
longitudinal study of child welfare workers, Lizano (2015) examined the antecedents of engagement
in the workplace but they did not link engagement to any worker well-being outcomes.
Empirical evidence linking work engagement to worker well-being exists in the general occupa­
tional psychology literature and study findings point to a positive relationship between work engage­
ment and psychological and physical well-being of workers. In their cross-sectional study of
Norwegian employees (n = 193) Bakken and Torp (2012) found a positive relationship between
work engagement and health. This finding is congruent with the results from a meta-analytic study
on the antecedents and consequence of work engagement that yielded a positive association between
work engagement and health (Halbesleben, 2010). Results from previous workforce studies suggest
that work engagement can also positively impact affective and psychological well-being of workers. In
their three-wave longitudinal study of Finnish dentists, Hakanen and Schaufeli (2012) found that
engagement was positively related to greater life satisfaction and lower depressive symptoms among
study participants. The study had longitudinal data available for close to 2,000 dentists and the results
suggest a causal relationship between engagement and positive affective/psychological consequences.
In a similar study of Japanese employees, Shimazu, Kubota, and Kawakami (2012) found that among
their almost 2,000 respondents (n = 1967), greater work engagement at Time 1 of the study was related
to higher levels of life satisfaction and overall health at Time 2 of the study (7 months later). Together,
these findings support a conceptualization of engagement and worker well-being where work engage­
ment predicts or leads to worker well-being.
 HUMAN SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS: MANAGEMENT, LEADERSHIP & GOVERNANCE 5

Current study
Based on the previous theory and empirical evidence linking work engagement and worker well-being,
it is hypothesized that greater levels of work engagement are positively related to life satisfaction and
health while controlling for demographic characteristics and workload.

Methods
Study design and procedures
Data for this study were drawn from a convenience sample of social workers and human service
workers using a self-administered workplace survey. The study participants were recruited at a social
work field instructor training in the Summer of 2016. The field instructor training was held at a public
university in the Southwestern region of the United States. The sampling frame consisted of social
workers and human service workers who at the time were field instructors supervising Bachelor of
Social Work (BSW) and Master of Social Work (MSW) interns. The study survey contained several
Likert-scale items measuring various workforce dimensions including work engagement and various
worker well-being outcomes. Hierarchical regression analysis was conducted to examine the relation­
ship between worker engagement, life satisfaction, and overall health.
During the introductory segment of the 8-hour training, an announcement was made by the study’s
Principal Investigator to participants about the nature of the study being conducted. Surveys and
informed consent form packets were distributed to all 200 training participants by research assistants.
Participants were given three possibilities to submit their survey. Those interested could opt to submit
the survey anytime during the training, at the end of the training, or they could take it home and mail
the survey to the P.I. at a later date. Envelopes with pre-paid postage were made available at the
registration table. The 8-hour training day had several breaks, including a one-hour lunch break
during which time participants had the opportunity to complete the survey. Participants who elected
to return their completed surveys were provided a ticket to be entered into a 25 USD gift card
opportunity drawing as a small token of gratitude for their participation in the study. Those who
would mail the survey would have been excluded from the drawing. No participants chose to submit
their survey by mail. Two hundred participants were given the survey and informed consent form and
133 participated in the cross-sectional study, yielding a response rate of 66%.

Measures
Control variables
Demographic variables. Several control variables were used in the present study. Study participants
were asked to self-report their age in years, their gender (Male = 0, Female = 1), and their tenure in the
current organization where they are employed (in months).

Workload. Workload was measured using the five-item Quantitative Workload Inventory (QWI;
Spector & Jex, 1998). Previous empirical research studies using the QWI lend support to the scale’s
reliability and validity as a workload measure (Spector et al., 1998). Some of the workload items
included: “How often does your job require you to work very fast? and “How often does your job
require you to work very hard?” The items were measured using a 5-point Likert scale where 1 = “Less
than once per month or never” and 5 = “Several times per day.” Chronbach’s alpha coefficient for the
QWI in the current study was .87.

Independent variable
Work engagement. Work engagement was measured using the nine-item Utrecht Work Engagement
Scale (UWES-9; Schaufeli et al., 2006). Previous research suggests that the UWES is a valid and reliable
measure of work engagement with acceptable psychometric properties (Schaufeli et al., 2006). Three
6 E. L. LIZANO

dimensions of work engagement were measured using the Utrectht Work Engagement Scale including
vigor (“At my job, I feel strong and vigorous”), dedication “My job inspires me”), and absorption (“I
am immersed in my work”). The UWES-9 items were measured in the present study using a Likert
scale ranging from, 0 = “Never” to 4 = “Always” (Every day), which differs from the original UWES-9
scale which ranges from 0 = “Never” to 6 “Always.” The three work engagement subscales, vigor,
dedication, and absorption yielded the following reliability scores, .83, .82, and .72, respectively. The
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for all UWES-9 items was .86.

Dependent variables
Life satisfaction. Life satisfaction was measured using the five-item, the Satisfaction with Life Scale
which has been determined to be a valid and reliable measure of life satisfaction (Diener, Emmons,
Larsen, & Griffin, 1985). Some sample items include “In most ways my life is close to ideal,” and “The
conditions of my life are excellent.” Life satisfaction was measured using a 7-point Likert scale where
1 = “Strongly Disagree” and 7 = “Strongly Agree.” The five-items yielded a reliability score of .88.

Overall health. Overall health was measured using a single-item self-report question. Single-item
general health question asking respondents to self-report their overall health is commonly used to
assess health status (DeSalvo et al., 2006; Hays, Spritzer, Thompson, & Cella, 2015). The single-item
question read as follows: “In general, how would you say your health is.” Response options for
participants included: 1 = Poor to 5 = Excellent. The psychometric properties of the single-item
general health measure have been previously examined and have demonstrated reliability and validity
when assessing general self-reported health (DeSalvo et al., 2006). Higher response scores were
indicative of perceptions of better health. The single item was drawn from the Medical Outcomes
Study (MOS) 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (Ware & Sherbourne, 1992).

Statistical analysis procedures

Two hierarchical linear multiple regression models were conducted to assess the relationship between
work engagement and affective and physical well-being. Assumptions (e.g. normality, linearity,
homoscedasticity) were tested prior to analysis to ensure that multiple regression was an appropriate
method of analysis to use in the present study. The continuous variables in the study were found to be
normally distributed. A review of scatterplots showed linearity between the independent variables and
the dependent variables and homoscedasticity of error terms. A review of the bivariate correlations
between the predictor variables showed no highly correlated variables suggesting that multicollinearity
is unlikely. All analyses descriptive statistics, correlation, and regression analyses were conducted
using IBM SPSS version 26. G*Power (3.1.9.6), a statistical power analysis program was used to
conduct a post hoc power analysis (Faul, Erdfelder, Lang, & Buchner, 2007). The post hoc analysis
using a two-tailed alpha of .05, with five (5) predictor variables, and medium effect size (.10) yielded
results suggesting sufficient power (.80).

Results
Study sample
The sample was comprised of n = 133 human service workers of whom 85% (n = 113) were female and
15% (n = 20) were male. The mean age for the sample was 44 (S.D. = 10.33). Participants self-reported
their race/ethnicity(ies) and they were given the opportunity to select more than one race/ethnicity.
Sixty participants (45%) identified as non-Hispanic/Latina(o) white. While 47 (35%) of those in the
study sample identified as Hispanic/Latina(o), 25 respondents identified as African American.
Five percent (N = 6) of the respondents self-identified as Asian/Asian Pacific Islander and 2%
(N = 3) were Native American Indian. The majority (97%) of the study participants reported having
 HUMAN SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS: MANAGEMENT, LEADERSHIP & GOVERNANCE 7

Table 1. Descriptive statistics and correlation matrix of study variables.

M (S.D.) Observed Range 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
1. Age 44 (10.33) 26–67 1.00
2. Tenure 6.16 (6.30) 1 mo.–30 yrs. .28** 1.00
3. Workload 18.70 (4.83) 5–25 −0.02 −0.07 1.00
4. Life Satisfaction 27.14 (5.67) 6–35 −0.02 −0.11 −0.02 1.00
5. Health 3.48 (.93) 1–5 0.09 0.01 −0.15 .33** 1.00
6. Work Engagement 29.41 (4.33) 18–36 .23* −0.03 0.01 .41** .27**
** = p � 0.01 level and * = p � 0.05 (2-tailed). Mean, standard deviation, and observed range information for age, gender, and
tenure are reported in the sample description within the results section.

a graduate degree. The range in organizational tenure ranged from 1 month to 30 years with a mean of
6.16 years (S.D. = 6.30 years). Approximately two-thirds (N = 89) of the study sample consisted of
individuals who identified as social workers while the remaining 12 participants who reported their
professional training/background identified as having been trained in psychology (N = 4), counseling
(N = 1), marriage and family therapy (N = 4), history (N = 1), or education (N = 2). Thirty-two study
participants did not report their professional training/background. All study participants were cur­
rently employed in various human service organization where an intern(s) was placed to complete
their required field hours to complete their BSW or MSW degrees at a Council of Social Work
Education Accredited School of Social Work in the Southwestern region of the U.S. Thirty-seven
(n = 37, 28%) respondents reported being employed in a private nonprofit organization, 95 (71%)
reported working in public/government agency, and one reported their agency as “other.”

Descriptive and bivariate analysis results

Table 1 presents descriptive statistics, the correlation matrix and the range of observed responses for
the study variables. The mean scale scores for the work engagement subscales for vigor, dedication,
and absorption were as follows: vigor (M = 3.04, S.D. = .76), dedication (M = 3.52, S.D. = .60), and
absorption (M = 3.23, S.D. = .75). The sample can be considered engaged when compared to other
cross-professional studies that have found a mean work engagement score for those in the human
service sector (e.g. social work, nonprofit sector, counseling) to be M = 3.89, M = 4.17, and M = 3.55
for vigor, dedication, and absorption on a “0 = “Never” to 6 “Always” scale. Based on the correlation
matrix, work engagement had a moderate and positive significant correlation to life satisfaction
(r = .41, p < .01) and health (r = .27, p < .01).

Table 2. Regression results for life satisfaction and health.

Step 1 Step 2
B S.E. β t B S.E. β t
LIFE SATISFACTION
Constant 30.10 3.57 8.43 14.52 4.64 3.13
Age 0.03 0.06 0.06 0.57 −0.04 0.06 −0.06 −0.67
Gender −1.98 1.59 −0.12 −1.25 −1.42 1.45 −0.09 −0.98
Tenure −0.02 0.01 −0.19 −1.91 −0.01 0.01 −0.12 −1.29
Workload −0.10 0.12 −0.08 −0.82 −0.07 0.11 −0.05 −0.59
Engagement 0.59** 0.13 0.43 4.70
Adjusted R2 0.02 0.19**
HEALTH
Constant 3.76 0.57 6.66 2.03 0.77 2.65
Age 0.01 0.01 0.11 1.07 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.13
Gender 0.08 0.26 0.03 0.30 0.15 0.25 0.06 0.63
Tenure 0.01 0.01 −0.05 −0.48 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.08
Workload −0.04* 0.02 −0.20 −2.03 −0.04* 0.02 −0.19 −2.00
Engagement 0.07** 0.02 0.31 3.20
Adjusted R2 0.01 0.09**
* = p < .05; ** = p < .01.
8 E. L. LIZANO

Regression results
Table 2 presents the hierarchical regression results for the outcome variables life satisfaction, and
health. For all four regression models the control variables of age, gender, tenure and workload were
entered in Step 1 and the variable engagement was entered in Step 2.

Life satisfaction
Life satisfaction was regressed on age, gender, tenure, and workload in Model 1. This model yielded no
significant regression coefficients between the control variables and life satisfaction. The independent
variable, work engagement was entered in Step 2 of the life satisfaction regression model yielding
a significant relationship between work engagement and life satisfaction (β ¼ :59; p < :01) when
controlling for age, gender, tenure, and workload. The regression model including the control
variables and work engagement explained 19% of the variance in life satisfaction.

Health
Model 1 of the multiple regression model with health as the dependent variable included the control
variables of age, gender, tenure, and workload. Model 1 in the health regression analysis yielded
a significant and negative relationship between workload and health (β ¼ :04; p < :05 and the model
explained 1% of variance in health. Work engagement was added to the control variables in Model 2.
Workload (β ¼ :04; p < :05) and work engagement (β ¼ :07; p < :01) were the only covariates
significantly related to health. The regression model includes the control variables and work engage­
ment explained 9% of variance in health.

Discussion
The purpose of the present study was to examine the relationship between worker engagement, life
satisfaction, and health of well-being of human service workers. Findings suggest that being engaged
with work is associated with greater levels of life satisfaction and health. In both regression models,
work engagement was significantly related to health and life satisfaction. The study findings are
congruent with previous studies linking work engagement to life satisfaction and health among
workers (Halbesleben, 2010; Shimazu et al., 2012).
Workload was the only control variable that yielded a significant relationship to worker well-being
in the regression model with health as the dependent variable. This finding is congruent with previous
research findings. In their meta-analytic study of the correlates of workload, Bowling, Alarcon, Bragg,
and Hartman (2015) analyzed 336 studies that examined the relationship between workload and some
aspect of worker well-being (e.g. affective, physical) and found that workload had a significant and
negative relationship to worker health but it was not significantly related to life satisfaction.
The findings from this study have implications for practice and future research within the human
services sector. To the researcher’s knowledge, this is the first study using an exclusively human service
sample that examines the relationship between work engagement and worker well-being. Findings
from this study point to the need to examine workplace interventions that can help bolster feelings of
vigor, dedication, and absorption (i.e. work engagement) of social workers and other human service
workers. Instead of taking a deficit-based approach to worker well-being by focusing efforts on
reducing job burnout, a focus on work engagement’s causes and consequences has the potential to
give organizational managers and leaders tools to increase work engagement.
The present study helps contribute to a greater understanding of workplace experiences that relate
to the well-being of human service workers. Nevertheless, the study has limitations that should be
taking into consideration when interpreting the results. First, the study is cross-sectional and therefore
causality cannot be inferred. This study’s use of a cross-sectional design precludes any discussion on
causality between work engagement and worker well-being. Though theory and previous empirical
research suggest that there is a causal relationship between work engagement and worker well-being,
 HUMAN SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS: MANAGEMENT, LEADERSHIP & GOVERNANCE 9

that cannot be ascertained here. Future research on the well-being consequences of work engagement
among human service workers should make use of longitudinal research designs that can be used to
test if a causal relationship exists between work engagement and worker well-being among human
service workers.
Despite this study’s findings having the potential to inform future efforts to create a more engaged
human service workforce as a way to promote worker well-being, this study does not examine any
predictors of work engagement. Future research should focus on examining predictors of work
engagement among human service workers. It would be important to test a conceptual framework
of work engagement’s predictors and consequences across human service subfields (e.g. child welfare,
mental health, community organizing) and between various organizational settings (e.g. pubic vs.
private agencies). A comparison of the predictors and consequences of work engagement across
subfields and organizational settings could provide researchers and organizational leaders with valu­
able information about the factors that can increase work engagement and its positive outcomes in
different work settings. This study uses only quantitative data and therefore lacks an in-depth look into
the experiences of workers who are engaged in their work. Qualitative research methods can be used to
delve deeper in the work experiences of human service workers and the workplace conditions that lead
to them feeling engaged with their work. A greater understanding of differences across organizations
and human service subfields as well as a more nuanced understanding of worker engagement through
the use of qualitative methods can help inform the development of tailored workplace/organizational
interventions that can increase work engagement.
The study findings are limited in generalizability because of the sampling method used (conve­
nience sample). Those who participated in the study were serving as field instructors to social work
interns and were attending a voluntary training. Therefore, it is possible that the sample consists of
human service workers who are very engaged in their work and willing to volunteer to supervise
interns and receive additional training. Like many other human service employee studies, this study
makes use of a nonrepresentative sample (i.e. convenience sample). The use of nonrepresentative
samples is common in workforce research within the field of human services (Mor Barak, Travis,
Pyun, & Xie, 2009). Despite the limitations that the use of a convenience sample presents, such as
limited generalizability of study findings, the present study makes a contribution to the literature. This
study is the first to examine work engagement in a human service worker-specific sample and the
findings point to a significant relationship between work engagement and well-being outcomes that
exist in this workforce population. Previous studies on work engagement among human service
workers have not explored the relationship between work engagement and worker well-being out­
comes might be. As an exploratory study, this study serves as the first step in this line of inquiry within
the human services field and it supports the assumption that the theorized relationship between work
engagement and worker well-being is relevant to human service workers.

Conclusion
The human service workforce continues to be the most valuable asset of human service organizations.
Managers, organizational leaders, and human service organization scholars should continue to explore
different avenues to promote worker well-being and work engagement has the potential to be one such
avenue.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
10 E. L. LIZANO

References
Arrington, P. (2008). Stress at work: How do social workers cope? NASW Membership Workforce Study. Washington, DC:
National Association of Social Workers.
Bakken, B., & Torp, S. (2012). Work engagement and health among industrial workers. Scandinavian Journal of
Organizational Psychology, 4(1), 4–20.
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, 389 – 411. http://dx .doi.org/10.1146/annurev-
orgpsych–031413–091235
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2017). Job demands–resources theory: taking stock and looking forward. Journal of
occupational health psychology, 22(3), 273–285
Bakker, A. B., & Leiter, M. P. (Eds.) (2010). Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research. New York,
NY: Psychology Press.
Bakker, A. B., Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., & Taris, T. W. (2008). Work engagement: An emerging concept in
occupational health psychology. Work & Stress, 22(3), 187–200. doi:10.1080/02678370802393649
Bakker, A. B., Westman, M., Van Emmerik, I. H., & Demerouti, E. (2009). The crossover of work engagement between
working couples. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24(3), 220–236. doi:10.1108/02683940910939313
Ballenger-Browning, K. K., Schmitz, K. J., Rothacker, J. A., Hammer, P. S., Webb-Murphy, J. A., & Johnson, D. C. (2011).
Predictors of burnout among military mental health providers. Military Medicine, 176(3), 253–260. doi:10.7205/
MILMED-D-10-00269
Bowling, N. A., Alarcon, G. M., Bragg, C. B., & Hartman, M. J. (2015). A meta-analytic examination of the potential
correlates and consequences of workload. Work & Stress, 29(2), 95–113. doi:10.1080/02678373.2015.1033037
Boyas, J. F., Wind, L. H., & Ruiz, E. (2013). Organizational tenure among child welfare workers, burnout, stress, and
intent to leave: Does employment-based social capital make a difference? Children and Youth Services Review, 35(10),
1657–1669. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2013.07.008
Bride, B. E. (2007). Prevalence of secondary traumatic stress among social workers. Social Work, 52(1), 63–70.
doi:10.1093/sw/52.1.63
Danna, K., & Griffin, R. W. (1999). Health and well-being in the workplace: A review and synthesis of the literature.
Journal of Management, 25, 357–384. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920639902500305
DeSalvo, K. B., Fisher, W. P., Tran, K., Bloser, N., Merrill, W., & Peabody, J. (2006). Assessing measurement properties of
two single-item general health measures. Quality of Life Research, 15(2), 191–201. doi:10.1007/s11136-005-0887-2
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 49, 71–75. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
Edwards, J. R., & Rothbard, N. P. (2000). Mechanisms linking work and family: Clarifying the relationship between work
and family constructs. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 178–199. doi:10.5465/amr.2000.2791609
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the
social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior research methods, 39(2), 175–191
Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). What good are positive emotions? Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 300–319. doi:10.1037/
1089-2680.2.3.300
Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden- and-build theory of
positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218
Geisler, M., Berthelsen, H., & Muhonen, T. (2019). Retaining social workers: The role of quality of work and
psychosocial safety climate for work engagement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment. Human Service
Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, 43(1), 1–15.
Goering, D. D., Shimazu, A., Zhou, F., Wada, T., & Sakai, R. (2017). Not if, but how they differ: A meta-analytic test of
the nomological networks of burnout and engagement. Burnout Research, 5, 21–34. doi:10.1016/j.burn.2017.05.003
González-Romá, V., Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Lloret, S. (2006). Burnout and work engagement: Independent
factors or opposite poles? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(1), 165–174. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2005.01.003
Government Accountability Office. (2003). Child welfare: HHS could play a greater role in helping child welfare agencies
recruit and retain staff [GAO-03-357]:Author, Washington DC.
Hakanen, J. J., Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2006). Burnout and work engagement among teachers. Journal of School
Psychology, 43(6), 495–513. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2005.11.001
Hakanen, J. J., Ropponen, A., Schaufeli, W. B., & De Witte, H. (2018). Who is engaged at work. A large-scale study in 30
European countries. American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 61(5), 373–381. doi:10.1097/
JOM.0000000000001528
Hakanen, J. J., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2012). Do burnout and work engagement predict depressive symptoms and life
satisfaction? A three-wave seven-year prospective study. Journal of Affective Disorders, 141(2), 415–424. doi:10.1016/j.
jad.2012.02.043
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: The essential theory and research. Psychology
Press.
 HUMAN SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS: MANAGEMENT, LEADERSHIP & GOVERNANCE 11

Hasenfeld, Y. (1983). Human service organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Hasenfeld, Y. 2010. The attributes of human service organizations. In HasenfeldY. (Ed.), Human services as complex
organizations, (pp. 9–32). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hays, R. D., Spritzer, K. L., Thompson, W. W., & Cella, D. (2015). US general population estimate for “excellent” to “poor”
self-rated health item. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 30(10), 1511–1516. doi:10.1007/s11606-015-3290-x
Kim, H., Ji, J., & Kao, D. (2011). Burnout and physical health among social workers: A three-year longitudinal study.
Social Work, 56(3), 258–268. doi:10.1093/sw/56.3.258
Kim, H., & Stoner, M. (2008). Burnout and turnover intention among social workers: Effects of role stress, job autonomy
and social support. Administration in Social Work, 32(3), 5–25. doi:10.1080/03643100801922357
Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (2017). Burnout and engagement: Contributions to a new vision. Burnout Research, 5, 55–57.
doi:10.1016/j.burn.2017.04.003
Lizano, E. L. (2015). Examining the impact of job burnout on the health and well-being of human service workers:
A systematic review and synthesis. Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, 39(3),
167–181.
Lloyd, C., King, R., & Chenoweth, L. (2002). Social work, stress and burnout: A review. Journal of Mental Health, 11(3),
255–265. doi:10.1080/09638230020023642
Maslach, C. (2003). Job burnout: New directions in research and intervention. Current Directions in Psychological
Science, 12, 189 –192.
Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., Leiter, M. P., Schaufeli, W. B., & Schwab, R. L. (1986). Maslach burnout inventory (Vol. 21,
pp. 3463–3464). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting psychologists press.
Mor Barak, M. E., Travis, D. J., Pyun, H., & Xie, B. (2009). The impact of supervision on worker outcomes: A
meta-analysis. Social Service Review, 83(1), 3–32. doi:10.1086/599028
Salanova, M., Schaufeli, W. B., Xanthopou- Lou, D., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). The gain spiral of resources and work
engagement: Sustaining a positive work life. In A. Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of
essential theory and research (pp. 118–131). New York: Psychology Press.
Salanova, M., Agut, S., & Peiró, J. M. (2005). Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee
performance and customer loyalty: The mediation of service climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1217.
doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1217
Schaufeli, W., Salanova, M., Gonza´lez-roma´, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and
burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71–92. doi:10.1023/
A:1015630930326
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). Defining and measuring work engagement: Bringing clarity to the concept. In
Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 10–24). New York: Psychology Press.
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, 66(4), 701–716. doi:10.1177/0013164405282471
Shimazu, A., Schaufeli, W.B., Kubota, K. and Kawakami, N. (2012). Do workaholism and work engagement predict
employee well-being and performance in opposite directions? Industrial Health, 50, (pp. 316–321).
Shin, J. (2011). Client violence and its negative impacts on work attitudes of child protection workers compared to
community service workers. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26(16), 3338–3360. doi:10.1177/0886260510393002
Smith, Y., Colletta, L. & Bender, A. E. (2017). Client violence against youth care workers: findings of an exploratory study
of workforce issues in residential treatment. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 91, 1–25. doi: 10.1177/
0886260517743551
Spector, P. E., & Jex, S. M. (1998). Development of four self-report measures of job stressors and strain: Interpersonal
Conflict at Work Scale, Organizational Constraints Scale, Quantitative Workload Inventory, and Physical Symptoms
Inventory. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 356–367.
Spector, P. E., & Jex, S. M. (1998). Development of four self-report measures of job stressors and strain: Interpersonal
Conflict at Work Scale, Organizational Constraints Scale, Quantitative Workload Inventory, and Physical Symptoms
Inventory. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 356–367
Ware, J. E., Jr., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual
framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30, 473–483. doi:10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002
Young, H. R., Glerum, D. R., Wang, W., & Joseph, D. L. (2018). Who are the most engaged at work? A meta-analysis of
personality and employee engagement. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(10), 1330–1346. doi:10.1002/job.2303